Environmental Change in Refugee-Affected Areas of the Third World: The Role of Policy and Research

Environmental Change in Refugee- Affected Areas of the Third World: The Role of Policy and Research

RICHARD BLACK

This paper reviews the current nature of policy responses to environmental change in refugee assistance programmes. Based on a review of existing documentary material and a survey of UK-based NGOs, it is suggested that although refugee assistance agencies are aware of environmental issues, this is rarely translated into effective policy measures to identify and combat environmental degradation. Various existing methods used to calculate environmental impacts are considered, but a number of pitfalls are identified. It is suggested that little is known about the processes that lead to accelerated environmental change in situations of forced displacement, and that research providing deeper understanding of local environments and resource management systems is required for environmental policies to be effective.

Recent events in the former Yugoslavia have brought the plight of refugees from war and persecution once again to the attention of the world's media. Beyond this media gaze, however, in many parts of the Third World, conflicts which have generated a total of over 40 million displaced people worldwide continue unabated. Indeed, despite the end of the Cold War and progress towards democ- racy in some Third World states, which have led to hope for the repatriation of some long-standing refugee populations such as Afghans and Mozambicans, new conflicts have led to some 16 separate country-to-country flows of refugees in the last five years. These flows have particularly affected some of the world's poorest countries. Over 1.2 million refugees were received, for example since 1988 in just

four countries: Guinea, Kenya, Bangla- desh and Cote d'Ivoire (USCR, 1993).

Large-scale flows of refugees moving within, or to, poorer regions in the Third World can have significant impacts on receiving areas. Strains may be placed, for example, on the infrastructures of receiving areas, affecting health (Kliot, 1987; Prothero, 1991), education (Khasiani, 1989) and social welfare services (Mayadas and Elliott, 1990). Although the arrival of large numbers of refugees may also have positive economic benefits, providing markets for local products, labour to increase production in labour-scarce areas, or leading to flows of international aid into particular regions, a further effect of the presence of refugees may be to increase pressure on available natural resources. This has led, for example, to competition

0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 lJF, UK and 238 Main Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.

DISASTERS VOLUME 18 NUMBER 2

108 Richard Black

for scarce resources between refugees and local host populations, or in some cases, to depletion of those resources, and environmental degradation (Black, 1993).

Studies of the impact of refugees on receiving areas are growing in number, although evidence remains scattered, and often over-specific to particular case studies (Black, in press). One area that has received very little attention, however, concerns the impact of refugees on natural resources and environment processes in host regions. A small number of academic studies suggest quite severe environmental impacts in certain refugee-affected areas, and notably in four countries or regions that received significant flows of refugees during the 1980s, namely the Horn of Africa (Young, 1985), Sudan (Kuhlman, 1990), Pakistan (Allan, 1987) and Malawi (Tamondong-Helin and Helin, 1991). Concern has been expressed in particular about deforestation resulting from refugees’ need for wood for cooking, heating and as a building material (GTZI UNHCR, 1992; von Buchwald, 1992) and to a lesser extent about land degradation, sometimes linked to deforestation (Tamondong-Helin and Helin, 1991).

Such concern reflects the fact that refugees are often forced to live in more marginal and vulnerable environments, and are reliant on limited natural resources for basic subsistence. Moreover, mass influxes of refugees may lead to critical population thresholds being reached, beyond which environmental degradation occurs, although there is little detailed evidence of such a process occurring. In this light, attention has recently focused amongst international agencies concerned with refugee assistance on policies designed to combat environmental degradation. The United Nations High Commis- sioner for Refugees (UNHCR), for example, has recently appointed a senior ’environmental coordinator’, and there has been a focus on environmental issues

in two recent special issues of the UNHCR house journals (Rapport, 1991; Refugees, 1992). Other organizations and agencies have also been active in this field, with the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), for example, being involved in a major review of environmental impacts in Sudan and Malawi alongside UNHCR (GTZIUNHCR, 1992).

Evidence of environmental change in refugee-affected areas is patchy, however, and too often based on visual observation or extrapolation of the calculated needs of individual refugee households, rather than on accurate measurement of the extent of degradation that has actually occurred. In this article, I review the scope of current environmental policy amongst inter- governmental agencies and non-govem- mental organizations (NGOs) working in the field of refugee assistance and examine options for its development. I argue that, although agencies are often aware of environmental issues, this is frequently based on an inadequate understanding of the processes leading to environmental change. In turn, this gap in understanding can only be addressed by detailed local research, which moves away from existing direct policy responses and examines wider socio-political and socio-economic issues.

The article is based on a search of documentary material in particular on refugee resettlement, designed to elicit information about demographic and environmental change in areas affected by such programmes of assistance. Assistance to refugees includes the implementation of full-scale ’resettlement’ programmes, in which planned settlements are established to which refugees are expected or forced to move, and in which agricultural land is often made available (Armstrong, 1988: Black and Mabwe, 1992): such programmes represent one type of ‘resettlement scheme’, alongside settlements established for those displaced by

DISASTERS VOLUME 18 NUMBER 2 0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994

Environmental Change in Refugee-Affected Areas 109

drought, development projects, and other causes. At the same time, some refugee assistance projects involve the establish- ment of temporary camps in which food, medical and other assistance is provided, whilst individual programmes promoting particular economic or social activities in either a settlement or camp setting might also be considered.

Material consulted includes published and unpublished academic research on areas of refugee resettlement; unpublished consultants’ reports on specific refugee programmes conducted by or for national governments, inter-governmental agencies and NGOs; and sets of guidelines for project planning in both refugee situations, and more widely in disaster and emergency situations involving displacement of population, and planned resettlement of populations resulting from development projects. In addition, a postal survey was undertaken of 50 operating and funding agencies working in the field of assistance to refugees and displaced persons, mainly involving UK-based NGOs, but including some significant non-UK NGOs and inter-governmental agencies represented in the UK.’ A total of 39 responses were received from this survey, from which 23 agencies were selected for analysis on the basis that they reported involvement in agriculture, forestry, income-generation andlor specialist environmental programmes in refugee- affected areas.* The survey provided information on the extent of each agency’s involvement in assistance to refugees and displaced persons; whether such ope- rations are geared primarily to emergency or long-term development goals; the particular sectors in which the agency funds or operates projects; the level of involvement in environment-related programmes in refugee-affected areas; and the extent to which each agency has developed environmental policies of relevance to refugee- affected areas.

GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN RESETTLEMENT SCHEMES

The ‘development’ and ‘disaster’ litera- tures are not lacking in detailed guidelines for environmental management in resettlement schemes, with a number of recent documents outlining environmental procedures of relevance to, though not specifically dealing with, refugee situations. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, for example, has produced environmental guidelines for planned resettlement projects in the humid tropics (Burbridge et al. 1988), whilst United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) environmental guidelines exist for rural workcamps (UNEP, 1988), as well as for agroforestry and afforestation projects (UNEP, 1986a; 1986b). Although the UNEP guidelines for rural workcamps specifically exclude refugee ’camps’ from direct discussion, it is noted that such camps have many elements in common with refugee camps (and settlements), such as their temporary nature, and the fact that they introduce non-resident people to a location (UNEP, 1988). In addition, other more general guidelines for assistance in conditions of involuntary displacement noted above (Cernea, 1988; OECD, 1991) also include environmental elements of relevance to refugee settlement programmes.

A number of general points can be drawn from these various publications. First, it is worth noting that current World Bank guidelines classify resettlement schemes as projects which often have diverse and significant environmental impacts, and which therefore normally require an Environmental Assessment (EA) to be carried out (World Bank, 1991). Indeed, separate World Bank guidelines drawn up by Cernea (1988) suggest that particular care should be taken over environmental matters in situations where displaced people make up more than 10 per

0 Basil Blackwell Ltd. 1994 DISASTERS VOLUME 18 NUMBER 2

110 Richard Black

cent of the population in the host area. In many refugee situations, the ratio is much higher, as for example in Malawi, where the ratio of refugees to local Malawians is more than one in five in the twelve districts affected by refugees. Similarly, the OECD (1991) suggest that in what they describe as ‘rural resettlement projects’, ‘such issues as deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, sanitation and pollution are likely to become serious’.

Each of the guidelines cited suggests some form of EA, which should include a description of the project environment, and the identification of project-environment interrelations and significant environmental impacts prior to project development. In addition, common themes of these sets of guidelines include the necessity for environmental assessment and monitoring throughout the ’project cycle’, from initial development of a settlement through to site use and closure. The involvement of local authority systems of both displaced and host populations, and analysis of land management strategies in both sending and receiving areas are recommended by Cernea (1988), who notes that ultimately, local leaders will take over responsibility for environmental management. Focusing more specifically on individual forestry, fisheries and agriculture-based projects within camps and settlements, comprehensive bio-physical and socio-economic checklists are provided by Burbridge et al. (1988) that are designed to identify potential adverse impacts, dealing separately with coastal, lowland and upland areas.

In addition to these specific sets of guidelines on environmental policy, a number of agencies produce field hand- books and source books for more general use in development projects of all kinds, and many of these also make reference to environmental issues of relevance in refugee assistance. The Oxfam Field Director’s Handbook (Pratt and Boyden, 1988), for

example, covers in detail such issues as degradation and erosion in agricultural programmes, social forestry and forest management, overgrazing and the selec- tion of suitable tree species, whilst a source book prepared by the Interchurch Relief and Development Alliance (Davis and Wall, 1993) provides advice on environmental information required in programme development, as well as ideas for environmental protection measures such as contour barriers, wind breaks and soil preparation techniques.

None of the above sets of guidelines, however, deals specifically with refugee situations, which might be seen as having different characteristics both to development projects in general and, indeed, to other situations of forced displacement. This is important, since in many respects, it might be expected that refugee populations would place greater strains on environmental resources than would be the case, for example, in more planned situations of displacement relating to development projects. Most importantly, refugees may perceive little benefit to arise from protecting the environment, because of their temporary and often insecure status in their host country, and the fact that they see their long-term future as lying else- where. In addition, refugee assistance programmes may themselves be designed in such a way as to avoid establishing permanent infrastructures of the kind that could assist in environmental management, since it is thought that these might encourage refugees not to return to their country of origin.

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES IN REFUGEE- AFFECTED AREAS

Focusing initially on the policies of UK- based NGOs, of the 39 agencies which replied to the survey, only 23 were involved in agriculture, income-generation, forestry or environmental pro-



grammes in refugee-affected areas. Of these, 15 were involved in both agricultural and income-generation programmes, whilst the remainder operated or funded programmes in either agriculture or income generation, but not both. None of the agencies contacted reported involvement in the overall planning of a refugee settlement. Nonetheless, most reported that for both agricultural and income- generating projects, the agency would normally conduct a needs assessment survey of the refugee population before the implementation of the project, whilst 10 reported that they would also carry out an assessment of the availability of natural resources, and 7 reported that they would normally carry out or fund a soil survey or more formal environmental impact assessment.

Some 14 agencies were also involved in funding or operating programmes designed to reduce environmental degradation in refugee-affected areas, either directly, or as part of a wider programme with other socio-economic goals. The most common form of environmental programme cited was in the forestry sector, including the raising and distribution of seedlings, tree planting, and the development of community woodlots and agrofor- esty schemes, whilst some agencies were also involved in soil and water conservation and other environmental programmes (Table 1). A concentration of projects in Sudan and the Horn of Africa was found amongst the UK-based NGOs, although projects were also identified in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal and the Phi- lippines. In many cases, such programmes were relatively small in scope, often ref- lecting the small scale nature of the agency’s operation overall.

In addition to such programmes, a total of 11 agencies reported that they also had a formal environmental policy or set of guidelines which was applicable to refugee assistance programmes, although in no

TABLE 1 Programmes addressing environmental

issues in refugee affected areas

Type of project Incidence

Afforestation 11 Soil conservation

(e .g . terracing) 3 Solar-powered ovens 2 Agroforestry 1 Community woodlots 1 Fuel-efficient stoves 1 Water harvesting 1

Source: Author’s survey of refugee assistance agencies, 1993

case was it clear that such guidelines were directed towards specific problems expected in refugee-affected areas which might contrast with more general development programmes. Such ‘policies’ also varied in degree of detail provided. Some agencies, for example, made comments such as: ‘we simply (not scientifically) ask ourselves what is the impact on the environment’; or statements noting that ’sustainable development’ represented a vital element of programme design overall, without stating how. In contrast, only three agencies provided or referred to a specific document or checklist which dealt in detail with environmental issues to be considered in programme planning in general, whilst one other noted that such guidelines were under preparation. One agency suggested that although they had no guidelines of their own, they would expect to follow host government guidelines on the environment.

Environmental Impact Assessment

A tentative conclusion can be drawn that although a number of agencies involved in refugee resettlement are showing a growing awareness of environmental issues,


112 Richard Black

formal environmental policies are as yet relatively underdeveloped. The question remains, however, as to what appropriate environmental policy objectives should be established in refugee situations. One possibility is the development of Environmen- tal Impact Assessments (EIAs) in refugee resttlement, which would seek to identify the potential impacts - which might be both positive and negative - of a resettlement scheme before funding and implementation. EIA has been developed mainly in the developed world (in the USA and, more recently, in Europe) before the funding of, for example, large scale public infrastructure schemes. In recent years there have been strenuous efforts to ensure that such EIAs are extended to such cases as resettlement schemes for people affected by large dams or other internationally-funded development projects.

A number of problems exist within EIA procedures which might warn against their adoption for refugee situations. From the start, it can be noted that EIAs are normally required only for large scale schemes involving substantial public expenditure far in excess of the kind of sum usually associated with refugee resettlement. Problems have been noted in the extension of such assessments to a Third World context, where their inflexible struc- tural framework has resulted in the production of over-complex 'add-on' environmental reports of little use to decision- makers (Stromquist and Tatham, 1992). Such EIAs are also heavily embedded in a legislative context specific to particular countries. The danger is of sidelining environmental considerations into a large report which is not read, rather than incorporating such concerns into planning at each stage of the development of a refugee settlement.

A more serious difficulty, though, stems from the purpose of EIAs in a developed world context, which is to assess whether a particular scheme should

be allowed to go ahead, or be stopped on environmental grounds. Such a purpose is arguably inappropriate in refugee situations, where it is unlikely that the desire for environmental protection would out- weigh the need for the provision of shelter and sustenance to a highly vulnerable population which has already been displaced. Indeed, for EIA to play such a role would risk providing excuses to host governments to adopt a more restrictive attitude towards refugees in general. In any case, the time involved in carrying out a full Environmental Impact Assessment would make it inappropriate particularly in an emergency situation, where settlement is an urgent priority.

Calculating environmental impacts

If formal EIA is not the answer, it might still be argued that a clear assessment of such impacts in refugee affected areas is needed in order to provide a baseline from which environmental conservation or protection policies can be developed. Once again, difficulties arise. The most common form of environmental assessment to date, for example, has involved calculating the average per capita or household consumption of wood for fuel and other purposes, and then multiplying this figure by the number of individual refugees or families to reach an annual consumption volume for the region as a whole. Such studies in Malawi (Long et al., 1990), Pakistan (WFP, 1992), and Sudan (GTZIUNHCR, 1992) have been used as evidence that large scale deforestation has occurred, and to argue that reafforestation schemes require urgent funding. These studies often take no account, however, of what a sustainable yield of wood for the area might be: they do not allow for collection of dead wood for fuel, often preferred by consumers both due to ease of collection and suitabi- lity for burning; they ignore the potential for importation of wood - in Malawi, for



example, there is evidence that large quan- tities of wood for refugee camps and settlements came from adjacent areas of Mozambique where there was little population pressure on resources; nor do they assess the potential for natural forest regeneration, especially once the refugees depart. As such, they risk overstating the extent of the problem, contributing to the perception that refugees represent a severe burden that must be resisted where possible by host governments.

An alternative method of measuring impact on woody biomass more generally would be to base studies on the analysis of remotely-sensed imagery, either from satellite data such as SPOT or LANDSAT TM, or aerial photographs. Also available is the Global Resource Information Data- base (GRID) developed by UNEP since 1985, which provides information on the extent of various kinds of land degradation worldwide, and can be used to develop an initial environmental profile for any particular site. Given suitable time series imagery, it is possible to calculate areas that have been denuded of vegetation over a particular time period around existing refugee settlements, although from such sources alone, it would not be possible to demonstrate a causal link between the presence of refugees and vegetational change. Analysis using both satellite and air photographic imagery has been carried out, for example, by Allan (1987) in areas of northern Pakistan affected by refugees from Afghanistan, showing significant degradation of forests in certain areas.

Once again, problems arise in terms of implications for policy. First, such analysis is likely to be costly, in terms of acquisition of imagery and the time needed for analysis, placing it beyond the reach of operational agencies assisting refugees. Moreover, the study of impacts in this way can only be carried out post facto, providing information about degradation that has occurred, but with little ability to predict

accurately future trends, although assessment of the state of woody biomass before programme implementation may assist in the evaluation of alternative sites. It is also important that such remote sensing analysis should be combined with verification, in the field, of vegetation abundance and, more generally, of the processes causing vegetational change. For example, the extent of damage to forests may be under- estimated where trees are lopped from the bottom upwards, but leaving the crowns, which appear intact on remotely-sensed images. Field verification itself, however, is a costly process where large areas are under study.

Environmental screening

Both formal EIA and detailed analysis of actual environmental change represent lengthy and costly processes for agencies involved in planning refugee settlements and, as such, arguably have relatively little potential to contribute to the planning process. One element of EIA that may be appropriate in the development of policy is the ’environmental screening’ process that occurs before more formal analysis. Such a screening process would normally take place on the basis of the generation of environmental checklists, designed to identify areas of potential environmental problems towards which policy can be directed.

In practice, many operational agencies already incorporate elements of a checklist approach in their planning of refugee settlements. Thus, detailed planning guidelines would normally include consideration of the necessity for adequate water resources and sanitation, to the extent that settlements are frequently sited on the basis of available water supplies. Such an approach is often extended, in planning documents, by the inclusion of assessments of the availability of land and woodland resources in settlement areas.


114 Richard Black

Additional consideration might be given to potential changes in the availability and use of these resources that might be promoted by the presence of refugees in an area, or the implementation of particular elements of an assistance programme, such that appropriate measures can be taken to ameliorate any negative environmental impacts.

Once again, dangers exist. Perhaps the most serious of these is the risk that once checklists or a standard screening process is established, that these will be applied without sufficient sensitivity to varying local ecologies and local systems of land management. What is required is not a pre-conceived list of issues that need to be addressed in the planning of resettlement schemes or other refugee assistance projects - such as ‘have measures been taken to prevent deforestation?’, or ‘have measures been taken to prevent wind erosion of soils?’ - but a procedure for learning from those who use natural resources and understand the pressures placed on them by increased demand. In this sense, ’environmental screening’ would involve not the application of a single ’model’ of best practice, but the provision of time and flexibility to consider, and respond to, potentially complex interactions between assistance programmes, refugees’ and locals’ needs, and environmental change.

CONCLUSION

Many of the world’s more vulnerable environmental regions are already exper- iencing pressures as a result variously of population growth, economic expansion, and global environmental change. The concentration of some of the worlds most vulnerable and disenfranchised people - refugees - in some of these vulnerable regions may have a number of negative impacts on the environment, although this process is by no means inevitable. In

extreme cases, this may itself lead to further conflict over the use of the natural environment, and the possibility of further displacement of populations. Such issues are beginning to be addressed by the international community, national governments, and aid agencies, but the extent of both knowledge and action at present remains limited.

Arising from the discussion above, two significant points deserve emphasis. First, it is important not to move into a cycle of ’blaming’ refugees for environmental degradation, which may have been significant before their arrival in a region, and which usually relates to a set of economic and political circumstances beyond the simple demands of refugees for natural resources. Indeed, the isolation of a ’refugee impact’ on the environment is itself dangerous if its outcome is to focus policy solely on restricting refugees’ activities - which may be essential for their subsistence - rather than dealing with more complex causes. The standard methods developed to date to assess environmental impacts also display significant problems for use in refugee situations: EIA is not applicable, whilst the analysis of satellite imagery may be too costly to make a significant contribution to the development of policy. These methods also share the characteristic of taking environmental issues away from the arena of public discussion and placing them in the hands of outside ‘experts‘ whose knowledge of, and commitment to the local area may be limited.

Leading on from this, it is also crucial that in developing policy to address environmental change in refugee-affected areas, there should be a clear understanding of the nature of the environmental processes occurring, and of the social, political and economic factors that are contributing to these processes. This points to the need for local-level research, specific to particular situations, which investigates the


Environmental Change in Refugee-Afected Areas 115

nature of peoples’ interaction with the natural environment, including their use and management of natural resources. The most promising source for building such research lies with investigation within both refugee and local host communities, examining not only people-environment relations, but also conflicts between, and compromises reached by, these two communities over environmental management.

Without such detailed ’indigenous’ knowledge, the risk is that environmental policy will have only externally-oriented goals, relating to the physical nature of the resource base (e.g., number of trees), rather than being sensitive to the necess- ary uses of those resources by local people and refugee populations, and potential systems for managing these uses. In addition, further research can help to identify other areas, apart from environmental interventions, in which policy makers can influence the nature and pace of environmental change. Issues of concern are likely to include questions of ownership of land and natural resources, andlor security of tenure and level of access to and rights to use these resources, as well as questions relating to the nature and pattern of refugee settlement. Each of these are areas where the presence of refugees can produce distinct circumstances which require qualitatively different measures or policies than if environmental change were being caused by ‘natural’ population increase.

Notes Research for this paper was funded by a grant on ’Involuntary settlement and environmental change: phase one’, funded under the Over- seas Development Administration’s Population and Environment Research Programme. The author also wishes to thank various partici- pants in the conference on ‘Refugees and environmental change’ held at the Royal Geo- graphical Society in September 1993 for many

helpful comments, and especially Koos Neefjes and Phil O’Keefe.

1. Agencies were drawn from the Refugee Participation Network, a global network of organizations and individuals concerned with refugee studies and refugee assistance, coordinated through the Refugee Studies Programme, University of Oxford. All agencies with a UK address and listing Third World activities were included.

2. The remaining 16 respondents were involved in other aspects of refugee assistance, such as education, health or community development, which were not considered likely to have significant environmental impacts.

References

Allan, N. (1987) Impact of Afghan refugees on the vegetation resources of Pakistan’s Hin- dukush-Himalaya, Mountain Research and Development 7, 200-4.

Armstrong, A. (1988) Aspects of refugee well- being in settlement schemes: an examination of the Tanzanian case. Journal of Refugee Studies 1, 57-73.

Black, R. (1993) Refugees and environmental change: global issues, Paper presented to conference on Refugees and environmental change, Royal Geographical Society, Lon- don, September 1993.

Black, R. (in press) Refugee migration and local economic development: the case of Eastern Zambia. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 85.

Black, R. and T. Mabwe (1992) Planning for refugees in Zambia: the settlement approach to food self-sufficiency. Third World Planning Review 14, 1-20.

Burbridge, P., R. Norgaard and G. Hartshorn (1988) Environmental guidelines for resettlement projects in the humid tropics. FA0 Environ- ment and Energy Paper, no. 9, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

Cernea, M. (1988) Involuntary resettlement in development projects: policy guidelines in World Bank-financed projects. World Bank Technical Paper, no. 80, The World Bank, Wash- ington, DC.

Davis, I. and M. Wall (1993) (eds.) Christian


116 Richard Black

perspectives on disaster management: a training manual. Interchurch Relief and Development Alliance, Geneva.

GTZ/UNHCR (1992) Domestic energy and refores- tation in refugee-affected areas: Sudan and Malawi. Main report. GTZlUNHCR Mission Report, Deutsche Gesellschafi fiir Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)/United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva.

Khasiani, S.A. (1989) The impact of refugees in receiving countries in Africa: the cases of refugee woman and refugee professionals. In R. Appleyard (ed.) The impact of international migration on developing countries, 235-48. CICRED, Paris.

Kliot, N. (1987) The era of homeless man. Geography 72, 109- 21.

Kuhlman, T. (1990) Burden or boon? Eritrean refugees in the Sudan. Zed, London.

Long, L., L. Cecsarini and J. Martin (1990) The local impact of Mozambican refugees in Malawi. Report to USAID and the US Embassy, Lilongwe, Malawi.

Mayadas, N. and D. Elliott (1990) Refugees: an introductory case study in international social welfare. In: D. Elliott, N. Mayadas and T. Watts (eds.), The world of social welfare, 281-95. C.C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois.

OECD (1991) Guidelines for aid agencies on involuntary displacement and resettlement in development projects. Organisation for Econ- omic Cooperation and Development, Deve- lopment Assistance Committee, Paris.

Pratt, B. and J. Boyden (1988) The Field Direc- tors' handbook: an Oxfam manual for development workers. Oxford University Press, Oxford .

Prothero, R.M. (1991) Refugee movements and health issues in sub-Saharan Africa. Paper presented to DARGPGSG conference on The refugee crisis: geographical perspectives on forced migration, King's College London, September 1991.

Rapport (1991) Special edition on the environment. Programme and Technical Support Section, UNHCR, Geneva.

Refugees (1992) Special edition on the environment. UNHCR, Geneva.

Stromquist, L. and S. Tatham (1992) A practical approach to environmental impact assess-

ment in developing countries. In: L. Strom- quist (ed.), Environment, development and Environmental Impact Assessment: notes on applied research. UNGI Report no. 82, Depart- ment of Physical Geography, Uppsala University, Sweden.

Tamondong-Helin, S. and W. Helin (1991) Migration and the environment: interrelation- ships in sub-Saharan Africa. Field Staff Reports, no. 22, Universities Field Staff International, Washington, DC.

UNEP (1986a) Environmental guidelines for afor- estation projects. UNEP Environmental Man- agement Guidelines, no. 9, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

UNEP (1986b) Environmental guidelines for agroforestry projects. UNEP Environmental Man- agement Guidelines, no. 11, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

UNEP (1988) Environmental guidelines for rural workcamps. UNEP Environmental Manage- ment Guidelines, no. 15, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

USCR (1993) World refugee survey, 1992. United States Committee for Refugees, Wash- ington, DC.

von Buchwald, U. (1992) Migration and environment: limits and possibilities of disaster relief. Paper presented at German Red Cross Semi- nar for Journalists on 'Man in Disaster: Causes, Assistance and Prevention', Bonn.

WFP (1992) Food aid review. World Food Pro- gramme, Rome.

World Bank (1991) Environmental assessment sourcebook. World Bank Technical Paper no. 139, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Young, L. (1985) A general assessment of the environmental impact of refugees in Soma- lia, with attention to the refugee agricultural programme. Disasters 9, 122- 33.

~

Richard Black Deparment of Geography King's College London Strand London WC2R 2LS U.K.

~


Date post:	02-Oct-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	richard-black
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

Environmental Change in Refugee-Affected Areas of the Third World: The Role of Policy and Research

Documents