Estimate number of IDPs and Returnees by County DisplacMobilityement Tracking M aTrackingtrix Mobility Track inRoundg Round 6 6 Published: 20 November 2019 o IOM DISPLACEMENT y n TRACKING MATRIX a M SOUTH SUDAN Renk Sudan
Melut
Fashoda Maban Abyei Pariang Malakal Lon Abiemnhom Baliet goc Panyikang huk Aweil North Twic
Aweil East Rubkona t
i U u C M an l a G Fangak al/ a Aweil West yo Pi n m gi g
Luakpiny/Nasir t Raja Aweil South u Nyirol iw Ethiopia Gogrial WestGogrial East Koch a Ayod M Aweil Centre J Tonj North u r R Leer iv Mayendit e r
Tonj East h
t Duk Uror
u Akobo P
o a S
Rumbek North n j y
n i j Wau o i
a T r Cueibet Twic East Rumbek Centre Pochalla Yirol East Central African Republic Rumbek East Nagero Bor South Yirol West Pibor Wulu A werial a
r
Tambura a z
Assessed locations N Mvolo Terekeka Estimated IDPs Estimates returnees from Mundri East Lafon Kapoeta North within South Sudan Ezo Mundri West Kapoeta East Estimated returnees from Ibba Maridi
abroad o
i
b
m Juba
State a Y Kapoeta South County Yei Torit La in Budi y Kilometers a Kenya Iko 0 25 50 100 150 200 Democratic Republic of Congo to Kajo-keji Magwi s Disclaimer: This map is for illustration Morobo purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not imply official Uganda dorsement or acceptance by IOM.
IDP Overview 95% 5% 1,397,440 IDPs 68,102 IDPs displaced only within previously displaced South Sudan abroad
Total number of IDPs present at time of assessment: 1,465,542 IDPs
83,847 Arrival period 543,714 (37%) 429,564 (29%) 192,130 (13%) (6%) 162,979 (11%) 2014-2015 2016-2017 2018 2018 Post 2019 Pre R-ARCSS R-ARCSS (Jan-June) (Jan-Sept) (Oct-Dec) 53,308 (4%) Unknown Returnee 70% 30% Overview 886,815 returnees 384,672 returnees from within South from abroad Sudan
Total number of returnees present at time of assessment: 1,271,487 returnees
Arrival period 275,384 (22%) 299,437 (24%) 307,516 (24%) 336,658 (26%) 2016-2017 2018 Pre R-ARCSS 2018 Post R-ARCSS 2019 (Jan-June) 52,492 (4%) (Jan-Sept) (Oct-Dec) Unknown 1 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
BACKGROUND Whilst national-level conflict has continued in certain areas of South Sudan, notably in the Equatoria Region, other parts of the country have faced rising instances of intercommunal and localized conflict, oftentimes related to livestock which are distinguished from conflict including national actors for the purposes of the DTM data collection exercise. However, the lines between livestock-related conflict, other forms of communal tensions and politically motivated violence are frequently blurred. Furthermore, the rainy season had been underway as of June 2016 causing not only further flood induced displacement but also hindering data collection efforts. Data collection for Round 6 took place in June 2019 following round 5 for which data collection was conducted in March 2019. IOM’s Displacement Tracking Matrix implements mobility tracking throughout South Sudan in order to establish a baseline for the number of IDPs and returnees present in the country at the time of assessment. The baselines are designed to support government, humanitarian and development actors in their responses. As of Mobility Tracking round six, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) IDP baseline is consolidated with DTM findings. Moving forward, the two agencies will continue working together to maintain a unified baseline on IDP populations updated in regular intervals. Mobility Tracking is implemented on a quarterly basis in order to keep track on South Sudan’s rapidly evolving displacement and return trends. Repeated instances of conflict and natural disasters have led to protracted as well as more recent displacement. Returnee and IDP figures are disaggregated by period of arrival and whether they have arrived from abroad or not. For IDPs, figures are available for those currently displaced having arrived in 2014-2015, 2016-2017, 2018 pre Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan or R-ARCSS henceforth (January – September 2018), 2018 post R-ARCSS (October – December 2018) and January – June 2019. METHODOLOGY The methodology comprises two interrelated tools: baseline area assessments at various administrative levels allowing for triangulation, and multi-sectoral location assessments conducted at the villages, neighbourhoods or displacement sites. 1. Baseline area assessments provide information on the presence of targeted populations in defined administrative sub-areas (following the 10-state payam system), and capture information at the group level on population categories (IDPs, returnees, relocated) and attributes such as time of arrival of the target population in the assessed location, return from abroad or South Sudan, displacement previous abroad or not, reasons for displacement and former home areas for IDPs (both captured on majority basis for a given payam), presence of and dates of displacement / return, and shelter conditions. The baseline area assessment form also comprises a list of locations (defined as villages / neighbourhoods / displacement sites) hosting displaced and/or returned populations. 2. Multi-sectoral location assessments at village / neighbourhood or site level are conducted to gather data on a more granular level, comprising sectors such as Health, WASH, S/NFI, Protection, FSL and Education. The objective of the location level assessments is to collect some key multisectoral indicators on the living conditions and needs of affected populations which can enable partners to prioritize locations for more in-depth sector-specific assessments. IDPs: Returnees: • Numbers (individuals and households) • Numbers (individuals and households) • IDPs from within South Sudan or abroad • Returnees from within South Sudan or abroad • Time of displacement (2014-2015; 2016-2017; 2018 • Time of return (2016-2017; 2018 pre R-ARCSS (January – pre R-ARCSS (January – September 2018); 2018 post September 2018); 2018 post R-ARCSS (October – December R-ARCSS (October – December 2018) and January – 2018) and January – June 2019 June 2019 • Displacement area for majority of returnees per period of arrival • Reason for displacement • Reason for displacement for the majority of returnees at • Type of settlement (displacement site or host community assessed locations per period of arrival setting) • Multiple displacement • Status of returnee housing (no damage, partial damage, server damage [makeshift shelter]) + number of relocated (see page 9 for definition), estimates of host community population size, occupation of shelters by non-owners, number of non-returned individuals / households by payam.
CLICK TO ACCESS DATA COLLECTION FORM - PAYAM LEVEL 2 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
KEY INFORMANTS: 5,642 individuals Information is obtained and triangulated through consultation with key informants, commonly comprised of local authorities, community leaders, religious leaders and humanitarian partners. In round 6, DTM consulted 5,642 key informants: 1,649 at the payam (i.e. sub-area) level, 4,138 at the village or neighbourhood level and 196 at displacement sites. Please note that these figures do not add up exactly when summed due to some key informants being interviewed at more than one administrative level. Direct observation at each location in addition to the triangulation and the subsequent verification process (data received through partners and other DTM tools such as biometric registration) at various administrative levels serves to further ensure maximum accuracy of findings.
LIMITATIONS Data confidence on payam level DTM teams access over 2,300 locations on quarterly intervals facing several logistical and access All Most Some None related challenges. Access challenges range from Key Informant data is bureaucratic and security related impediments to 15% 46% 32% 6% physical constraints in hard-to reach areas. In order consistent with observations to obtain best results, DTM triangulates data from Key Informant 14% 43% 35% 7% as many key informants as possible. In 14 per cent data is consistent of payams (470 payams, i.e. sub-areas) all and in 43 per cent most key informant data was consistent. Key Informant has 14% 30% 34% 21% Whilst in only six per cent of cases no key IDP / returnee list informant data was consistent with observations, enumerators reported that at a fifth of payams, no 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% IDP or returnee logs were kept by local officials. Unknown (1% each) For more information, please consult the graph to the right.
Locations covered by County as of June 2019 SCOPE: 2,312 locations,DTM 470 Mobi lipayams,ty Tracking R78oun dcounties, 6 10 states o y n a In Round 6, DTM accessed 2,312 locations (villages / neighbourhoods and displacement M sites) representing a 17 per cent increase since round 5 (1,973 locations assessed). Accessed Renk Sudan locations were spread across 470 payams (i.e. sub-areas) across every county (78) in all 10 states. Locations are only assessed upon confirmation of presence of targeted populations. Melut
oda Maban Fash Pariang m Pa Malakal ho ny n ika A m ie R ng Baliet w b A u b Aweil North e i k L t o l o n M i g E o n c u h a a C u y a a L k s Twic o G na u t m Fangak l/Pi a g k Aweil West i p in U y t l / t s a N u n e a w g s i Aweil South i a Raja W Koch r Gogrial East Nyirol M Ethiopia l
a i Aweil Centre r
g
o Tonj North t r Ayod G i e
d e
n L e y a st M Ea J j u on r T P R a Akobo i n Duk Uror v Ru y e mb i ek N j r ort i h a
r h
Wau t t
Central African Republic u e
o b i re S t Twic East Pochalla e n j e u C
n C k
o e
T b t Y m s iro u Ea l E R k as be t m Ru Location type Nagero Bor South Yirol West Host community setting Pibor Wulu A werial
Displacement site setting a Tambura r a Mvolo z State N
Terekeka h
t
r t
s # of Locations covered by County o
a M N
E
u i a
t 4 - 16 r n
e d d Lafon
o n
o r
i p i u Ezo Kapoeta East
a 17 - 30 b Ibba Maridi W M
K
m e
a s 31 - 47 Y t Juba 48 - 81 Kapoeta South La in 82 - 118 y Torit Budi Yei a
Iko Kilometers to Kenya Democratic Republic of Congo K s 0 25 50 100 150 200 ajo-keji Magwi Morobo 3 Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do Uganda not imply official dorsement or acceptance by IOM. SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6 IDPs: Displaced due to Conflict 2014 to June 2019 Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not imply official dorsement Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6 SOUTH SUDAN Click on maps to oseer acceptan cA4e by IOM . version.
o y n Displacement due to conflictSudan a 1,465,542 IDPs M (arrival: 2014 - June 2019) Renk currently displaced of whom...
246,826 IDPs Melut
oda Maban Fash arrived at their current location Pariang m Pa Malakal ho ny n ika A m ie R ng Baliet w b A u b Aweil North e k i Lo l o n M g since R-ARCSS E o a n Guit ch a C u y a a L k s Twic o na u t m Fangak l/Pi a g k Aweil West i p in U y t l / t s a N u
e n a w g s i Aweil South i a Raja W Koch r Gogrial East Nyirol M INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT l
a i Aweil Centre r
g
o Tonj North t r Ayod G i e
d e
n L e y Amongst the currently displaced population a Central African Republic st M Ea Ethiopia J j u on r T P R a Akobo i n Duk Uror v Rum y e be i k N j r orth i (2014 to June 2019), more had been displaced a
r h
Wau t t
u e
o b i re
S t Pochalla e n Twic East j e u C n due to conflict (67%, involving national actors) C k o e
T b t Y m as iro u E l E R k as be t m Ru than communal clashes which encompass other Nagero Bor South Yirol West Pibor Wulu Awerial
a forms of violence that do not directly involve Tambura r a Mvolo z
N
Terekeka h
t
r t
s o the state (18%). Natural disasters represented a M N Number of individuals by County E
u i a
t r n
e d d Lafon
o n 0 o r i p i u Ezo Kapoeta East
a b Ibba Maridi W M K less than one per cent but are likely to have m e a s
1 - 5,000 Y t
5,001 - 20,000 Juba caused more short-term displacement in the Kapoeta South La in 20,001 - 30,000 y Torit Budi Yei a Kenya Ik past meaning that these would not be reflected 30,001 - 80,000 ot o K s IDPs: Displaced due to Communal Clashes 2014 taojo-k eJji uneMa g2wi 019 Disclaimer: This map is for illustration 80,001 - 130,000 Democratic Republic of Congo Morobo purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not imKilpomlye toerfsficial dorsement 0 20 40 80 120 160 in the current snapshot. For 15 per cent either State Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6 SOUTH SUDAN Uganda or acceptance by IOM. the reason or period of arrival were unknown. o y n Sudan a Displacement due to communal clashes M Available data suggests that the total number (arrival: 2014 - June 2019) Renk and share of those displaced by communal clashes increased and replaced conflict as most Melut
oda Maban dominant reason for displacement in 2019 Fash Pariang m Pa Malakal ho ny n ika A m ie R ng Baliet w b A u b (162,979 IDP arrivals since the start of 2019). e Aweil North k i Lo l o n M g E o a n Guit ch a C u y a a L k s Twic o na u t m Fangak l/Pi a g k Aweil West i p Whilst this does reflect the gradual decline in U y t l / t s a N u
e n a w g s i Aweil South i a Raja W Koch r Gogrial East Nyirol M l
a i Aweil Centre r in conflict involving national actors and the g
o Tonj North t r Ayod G i e
d e
n L e y a increase in violence in the form of communal Central African Republic st M Ea Ethiopia J j u on r T P R a Akobo i n Duk Uror v Rum y e be i k N j r orth i a
clashes, especially involving livestock, one r h
Wau t t
u e
o b i re
S t Pochalla e n Twic East j e u C n C k should not dismiss the possibility of communal o e T b t Y m as iro u E l E R k as be t m Ru clashes causing more short-term displacement Nagero st Bor South Yirol We Pibor Wulu Awerial
a Tambura r leading to a potential underrepresentation of a Mvolo z
N
Terekeka h
t
r t
s o
a M N past instances of communal conflict as reason Number of individuals E
u i a
t r n
e d d Lafon
o n 0 o r i p i u Ezo Kapoeta East
a b Ibba Maridi W M K
m e for displacement amongst currently displaced a s 1 - 5,000 Y t
5,001 - 20,000 Juba Kapoeta South populations. L a in 20,001 - 30,000 y Torit Budi Yei a Kenya 30,001 - 80,000 Iko to Disclaimer: This map is for illustration IDPs: Displaced due to Natural Disaster 2014 to JKuajone 20Ma1gw9i s Half of all IDPs who arrived at their current -keji purposes only. Names and boundaries 80,001 - 130,000 Democratic Republic of Congo Morobo on this map do not imKpilloym oetfefriscial dorsement Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6 SOUTH SUDAN or accepta0nce2 0by4 I0OM. 80 120 160 locations in 2019 had been displaced due to State Uganda
o y n communal clashes (49%) with 30 per cent Sudan a Displacement due to Natural M citing conflict (unknown for the remaining). Disasters (arrival: 2014 - June 2019) Renk During this period communal clashes induced displacement was mainly recorded in Warrap Melut
oda Maban Fash State (27,682 IDPs), Western Bahr el Ghazal Pariang m Pa Malakal ho ny n ika A m ie R ng Baliet w b A u b Aweil North e k i Lo l o n M g (22,112 IDPs) and Eastern Equatoria (17,388 E o a n Guit ch a C u y a a L k s Twic o na u t m Fangak l/Pi a g k Aweil West i p in U y t / t l N IDPs). s a u e n a w g s i Aweil South i a Raja W Koch r Gogrial East Nyirol M l
a i Aweil Centre r
g
o Tonj North t r Ayod G i e
d e
n L When considering payams in which IDPs arrived e y a Central African Republic st M Ea Ethiopia J j u on r T P R a Akobo for a given time-period, displacements from i n Duk Uror v Rum y e be i k N j r orth i a
r h
Wau t t
u e
o b i re within the same county and same state seem S t Pochalla e n Twic East j e u C n C k
o e
T b t Y m as iro u E l E R k as be t to be reported by an increasing number of m Ru Nagero Bor South Yirol West Pibor payams over time making up 65 per cent of the Wulu Awerial
a Tambura r a Mvolo z
N
Terekeka h 146 payams that reported new IDP arrivals in t
r t
s o
a M N
E
u i a
t r n
e d d Lafon
o n
o r
i p i u 2019. A smaller proportion of more long-term Number of individuals Ezo Kapoeta East
a b Ibba Maridi W M K
m e
a s
0 Y t localized displacement could in part be due to 1 - 5,000 Juba Kapoeta South La in 5,001 - 20,000 y Torit Budi quicker returns for those who were displaced Yei a Kenya 20,001 - 30,000 Iko to K s ajo-keji Magwi 30,001 - 50,000 Democratic Republic of Congo Morobo close to their habitual residences. Kilometers 4 0 20 40 80 120 160 State Uganda SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
Sub-areas with majority of IDPs having come from same Average Number of 5 counties accounting for / other state and county (100% = number of payams IDP arrivals previously most IDP arrivals where IDPs arrived for given time period) displaced abroad per R-ARCSS (October 2018 - June 2019) month 2019 (146 payams) • Wau: 36,487 14% 21% 65% 2,069 • Yei: 23,213 2018 post R-ARCSS (163 payams) 12% 28% 60% • Jur River: 21,054 2018 pre R-ARCSS (224 payams) • Kapoeta East: 16,455 22% 23% 55% 1,139 1,024 • Gogrial West: 14,560 2016-2017 (344 payams) 18% 28% 53% accounting for 45% of the caseload 2014-2015 (298 payams) displaced in this period 23% 25% 51% Di erent State / Di erent County Same State / Same County 2016-2017 2018 2019 DTM mapped a total of 1,465,542 IDPs Same State / Di erent County who have arrived at current locations between 2014 and June 2019. Please note that displaced individuals that arrived at Monthly average of IDP arrivals for given period of analysis comparing conflict / assessed locations during this period but communal clashes* that have since returned or moved won’t be considered in this snapshot. This figure 25,000 100% also includes individuals displaced at a point 90% in time further in the past that have moved to a new host area since the signing of 20,000 80% R-ARCSS. 70%
Overall five per cent of all IDPs (68,102) 15,000 60% had arrived at current locations from abroad 50% but were unable to reach their habitual 10,000 40% residences or other destinations finding 30% themselves in renewed displacement. States with the highest populations of these were 5,000 20% Unity (18,338 individuals representing 7% 10% of the state’s IDPs), Upper Nile (15,777 0 0% individuals representing 9% of the state’s 2014-2015 2016-2017 2018 2019 (Jan-June) IDPs) and Central Equatoria (10,586 Average # of IDPs arriving / month Share (%) of IDPs arriving / month individuals representing 5% of the state’s Conflict Communal clashes Communal clashes Conict IDPs). The state with the highest proportion of IDPs previously displaced abroad was Eastern Equatoria with 10 per cent (6,900 To consider when reading findings related to IDPs individuals) of the state’s overall IDP Figures only concern individuals remaining in a situation of displacement at the time of assessment. population. Consequently, the real number of people who were displaced during a given period will be higher than Overall, a 29 per cent of of all IDPs were what is captured in the current figures – i.e. excluding those who since returned / relocated or were displaced elsewhere. reported to live across the 100 displacement If displacement due to communal clashes results in shorter periods of displacement, i.e. quicker return sites identified by DTM in Round 6. Some or relocation, then the level of displacement due to communal clashes could be understated for a 71 per cent were recorded as living in host past period of time when comparing it to conflict, which might cause longer-term displacement, and community settings. The proportion of IDPs is therefore more likely to make it into the current analysis. living in displacement sites was especially high Some IDPs having arrived at their current (June 2019) destination within the post R-ARCSS period in Unity State (46%) and Central Equatoria have been multiply displaced meaning that the recorded (initial) cause for displacement was an event (57%) which both host large PoC sites. further in the past.
* Please note that this graph does not represent the number of individuals displaced during a given period. Figures are limited to those who remain currently displaced persons, i.e. excluding anyone who was displaced but has since returned. Not represented: overall, time of displacement is unknown for 53,308 (4%) 5 IDPs; for 159,860 the reason is unknown; 4,320 were displaced due to natural disasters (0.3%). SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
Counties with the highest number of IDP arrivals since the signing of R-ARCSS, October 2018
The county with the highest number of IDP arrivals after October 2018 was Wau (Western Bahr el Ghazal) with a total of 36,487 individuals present in June 2019 and who were reported to have arrived after R-ARCSS (mainly Wau North and South but also Besilia). Mobility Tracking data suggests that most of these have arrived from Wau and the adjacent Jur River County. Displacement Site Flow Monitoring and a specially designed Jur River Influx Survey are in line with these findings suggesting increased arrivals from Jur River between (mainly) March and May 2019 as detailed in this report. Increased returns to Wau Town from PoC AA and collective centres, especially in the beginning of the year (as suggested by DTM’s Displacement Site Wau (Western Bahr el Ghazal) Flow Monitoring) indicate the area to be considered relatively safe by surrounding populations which could explain why it became the destination of choice for some of these newcomers (in combination with other factors just as geographical proximity).
Key informants in Yei County reported the presence of 23,213 newly arrived IDPs since R-ARCSS. Of these, 95 per cent cited conflict as reason for displacement as opposed to communal clashed or natural disasters. Yei is indeed located in and close to areas of conflict between government and rebel forces. Twelve per cent of IDPs were said to have arrived from displacement abroad unable to reach their former homes or other intended destinations. This figure is higher than the overall 5 per cent for the entire country. Tensions have been increasing in areas south of Yei around the time of data collection and clashes between parties have resulted in violations. Yei (Central Equatoria)
Jur River was third on the list as county with the highest number of new IDP arrivals since R-ARCSS (21,054) IDPs. Not all IDPs fleeing violence between pastoralists and farmers were able or willing to leave the county. DTM detailed earlier instances of displacement in and from Jur River in Event Tracking reports (Jur River and Wau May and April) which suggest that the elevated number of new arrivals of IDPs in Jur River locations be linked with these events. Round 6 Mobility Tracking data suggests that at least three quarter of IDPs since October 2018 were displaced due to communal clashes with the reason being unknown for 14 per cent and conflict for 11 per cent. Jur River (Western Bahr el Ghazal)
Kapoeta East saw the arrival of 16,455 new IDPs since R-ARCSS present in June 2019 of whom all were reported to have been displaced due to communal clashes. The vast majority were observed in Mogos Payam (96%).
Kapoeta East (Eastern Bahr el Ghazal) Some 14,560 IDPs arrived in locations of Gogrial West County between October 2018 and June 2019. The vast majority were reported to have been displaced due to communal clashes (93.6%). Most IDP within this group were observed in Kuac North-Kuajok (47%) and Kuac South (42%). Gogrial West (Warrap)
6 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
RETURNEES 1,271,487 returnees: 30% from abroad Overall, DTM mapped the presence of 1,271,487 at the time of assessment returnees who have returned between 2016 of whom... and June 2019, notably in Jonglei (191,052 644,174 returnees returnees), Upper Nile (164,068 returnees) and arrived since R-ARCSS Western Bahr el Ghazal (162,770 returnees). Average Number of returnee arrivals per month within given period Returns from abroad were especially common 70,378 in Northern Bahr el Ghazal (102,271 returnees from abroad or 87% of the state’s returnees) and Eastern Equatoria (76,268 returnees, 78% of the state’s returnees). Similar to trends with IDP 40,506 departure locations, the more recent the arrivals 32,127 were, the higher the proportion of payams 22,227 where returnees arrived from the from a location 15,604 within the same county. This is potentially due 8,378 11,043 to the possibility that localised displacement in 3,096 the past saw populations returning quicker than 2016-2017 2018 2018 2019 displacement across further distances. pre R-ARCSS post R-ARCSS Jan.-June Estimated number of Returnees Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking RoundI n6t, ernal Returnees Returnees from Abrimopaly dofficial endorsement or acceptance by IOM. Click on map to see JA4une version. 2019
ESTIMATED # OF RETURNEES PER COUNTY
Comparing Returns from Abroad and from within South Sudan Renk Sudan
o y Melut n a
M
Fashoda Maban Pariang Malakal Abiemnhom Aweil East Panyikang Baliet Aweil North C ana l/Pi Twic gi RubkonaGuit U Longochuk Aweil West Mayom la Fangak n Luakpiny/Nasir g Maiwut Aweil South Gogrial East Raja Koch Aweil Centre Nyirol Ethiopia Gogrial West Tonj North Leer Ayod
J Mayendit u r R Tonj East i v P e r a n y Uror i Duk j i Akobo a
r h
Wau t Rumbek North u
o Twic East
S
j
n Pochalla
o Cueibet T Rumbek Centre Yirol East Central African Republic Rumbek East Nagero
Yirol West Pibor Wulu Bor South Tambura Awerial
Mvolo Terekeka
h
t
Subset of returnee individuals r
o
(previously displaced only in South Sudan) N
a
present at time of assessment Mundri West t Mundri East Lafon e o Ezo p a Kapoeta East Subset of returnee individuals Ibba (previously displaced abroad) K present at time of assessment Maridi
a r Yambio a z Juba Kapoeta South N L 0 a in y a 1 - 1 000 Torit Budi Ik Yei ot 1001 - 10 000 os Kenya Democratic Republic of Congo 10 001 - 20 000 Kajo-keji 20 001 - 30 000 State Morobo Kilometers 30 001 - 0 000 County Magwi 0 25 50 100 150 200 Uganda 0 001 - 130 000 7 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
Recent returns: 5 counties accounting for DTM recorded the presence of 1,271,487 returnees who were at covered most returnee arrivals locations at the time of assessment and who had arrived between 2016 and R-ARCSS (October 2018 - June 2019) June 2019. Amongst these, just under a third arrived from abroad (384,672 returnees, i.e. 30%). Half of all currently returned individuals had arrived at • Wau: 80,561 assessed locations after the signing of R-ARCSS (644,174 returnees, i.e. 51%). • Rumbek North: 41,804 For a further breakdown of arrivals since R-ARCSS, please note that 307,516 of • Maban: 27,923 these arrived between October and December 2018 (24%) and that 336,658 • Magwi: 26,420 arrived between January and June 2019 (27%). This indicates a spike in arrivals in • Terekeka: 19,609 the three months following the signing of R-ARCSS when the monthly average accounting for 30% of the caseload number of returnees (currently still returned) reached 102,505 individuals returned since the agreement compared to the monthly average of 33,271 individuals for January – September 2018 or the following period January to June 2019 when the average reduced Sub-areas with majority of returnees having to 56,110 individuals per month. come from same / other state and county (100% = number of payams where returnee The states with the most returnees since R-ARCSS were found to be Western arrived for given time period) Bahr el Ghazal (106,093 returnees), Western Equatoria (83,535 returnees) and Upper Nile State (82,941 returnees). The returnee population of Lakes State 2019 (264 payams) has the largest proportion of new arrivals as 65 per cent (62,857 returnees) of 25% 36% 38% its overall returnee population (97,227 returnees) arrived at current locations 2018 post R-ARCSS (278 payams) after R-ARCSS. Lakes is followed by Western Bahr el Ghazal in this regard where 33% 31% 35% 65 per cent (106,093 returnees) of the state’s overall 2018 pre R-ARCSS (284 payams) Di erent State / Di erent County returnee population arrived at current locations after 37% 33% 30% Same State / Di erent County October 2018 (162,770). 2016-2017 (241 payams) Same State / Same County 44% 26% 30%
Disclaimer: This map is for illustration Shelter: SHELTER STATUSShelte rOF sta tRETURNEESus of returnees purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not imply official dorsement Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6 SOUTH SUDAN or acceptance by IOM. Overall returnees are Manyo reported to live in severely Sudan damaged, partially damaged
k
n and undamaged housing e
R in equal proportions (31% Melut each) with the status of Fashoda Maban Baliet Pariang Malakal housing remaining unknown Abiemnhom Panyikang Aweil North Rubkona for six per cent. The highest Aweil East Guit Longochuk Twic Mayom Canal/Pigi Aweil West Fangak total number of returnees Luakpiny/Nasir Maiwut Aweil South Raja GogriaGl Wogersiatl East Koch Nyirol Ulang living in severely damaged Aweil Centre Ayod Tonj North MayendLiteer shelters was reported Central African Republic Tonj East Ethiopia Duk Uror Akobo
in Upper Nile (72,202 Rumbek North Panyijiar h J t u u
returnees) and Lakes (60,230 r o R S Twic East Po Cueibet
j Rumbek Centre iv c
Wau n h e a r o lla returnees). In latter state T Yirol East Rumbek East Nagero returnees were also the Bor South Number of individuals Yirol West Pibor Wulu Awerial Ta ra most likely to live in severely m a Mvolo z bu 36,000 ra N damaged shelters as 62 per Terekeka Shelter status Ibba Mundri East Kapoeta North Mundri West Lafon cent of the state’s overall No damage Ezo Kapoeta East Partially damaged o Maridi
i
returnee population was b Bu Juba m dKapoeta South
Severly damaged a i Y Torit reported to live in makeshift Yei Unknown Lainya Kenya
Ik shelters. Admin 1 ot Kajo-keji Magwi os Democratic Republic of Congo Morobo Admin 2 Kilometers Uganda 0 20 40 80 120 160 Click on map to see A4 version. 8 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
DEFINITIONS
IDPs Persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized state border. South Sudan: Time of arrival in assessed area considered: 2014 to June 2019
Returnees: internal / from abroad Someone who was displaced from their habitual residence either within South Sudan or abroad, who has since returned to their habitual residence. Please note: the returnee category, for the purpose of DTM data collection, is restricted to individuals who returned to the exact location of their habitual residence, or an adjacent area based on a free decision. South Sudanese displaced persons having crossed the border into South Sudan from neighboring countries without having reached their home are still displaced and as such not counted in the returnee category. South Sudan: Time of arrival in assessed area considered: 2016 to June 2019
Relocated Individuals Someone who was displaced from their habitual residence either within South Sudan or abroad, who has since relocated voluntarily (independently or with the help of other actors) to another location than their former habitual residence, without an intention to return to their former habitual residence.
Note on returnee definition
The IOM DTM returnee figure from abroad cannot be compared directly with the spontaneous refugee returnees reported by UNHCR. The latter can have returned home (this would be captured as part of the returnees from abroad category in IOM DTM), but they may also find themselves in a situation of continued displacement or have chosen a new habitual residence (in both cases, they would be considered but not directly visible as part of the IDP and relocated figures reported by IOM). UNHCR and IOM technical teams are exploring how to improve data sharing to enable comparison and integration of numbers published by each agency.
CLICK TO ACCESS DATASETS Mobility Tracking round 6: Baseline IDPs / Returnees by payam 78 Counties 470 payams BASELINE Mobility Tracking round 6: Baseline IDPs / Returnees by location 2,312 locations
1,776 84 MULTISECTOR Round 6: Village / Neighbourhood locations Round 6: Site sites
9 SOUTH SUDAN O D S A NT T A N AT T Mobility Tracking Round 6
CLICK TO ACCESS THEMATIC MAPS
Estimated number of Returnees and period of arrival Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. Names and boundaries on this map do not Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6, imply official endorsement or acceptance by IOM. Estimated number of IDPs and period of arrival Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. Estimated number of IDPs by location type (Site/Host Community) Disclaimer: This map is for illustration purposes only. June 2019 Names and boundaries on this map do not Names and boundaries on this map do not Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6, imply official endorsement or acceptance by IOM. Displacement Tracking Matrix Mobility Tracking Round 6, imply official endorsement or acceptance by IOM. June 2019 June 2019
Renk
Sudan Renk Sudan Renk
Sudan o Sudan y n a M Melut
o o y Melut y n n a
a M M Melut Fashoda Maban Fashoda IDP Displacement Pariang Maban Panyikang Malakal Fashoda Maban Pariang Malakal Abiemnhom Baliet Abiemnhom Pariang Panyikang Malakal Panyikang Aweil North Rubkona Baliet Aweil East Abiemnhom Baliet Twic Mayom Guit Longochuk Aweil East Rubkona C Aweil East Guit an Aweil West Fangak al/ Canal/Pigi Pig Aweil North Rubkona Aweil North i Twic Mayom t Twic Longochuk s Guit Aweil W Longochuk a Luakpiny/Nasir Mayom est U C U t E a t l l Maiwut n a s Fangak al la # of IDPs by s Fangak Luakpiny/Nasir Raja a Koch Returnees by n Aweil South Aweil West /P a e i Nyirol ig n Luakpiny/Nasir g r i g E g Ethiopia Aweil South l Maiwut W o t a U s ri l G a a Ayod l g i a E r l Maiwut Raja o Koch Aweil Centre Mayendit n g g Raja Aweil South ia G Nyirol r Nyirol o g Koch r Gogrial West o Ethiopia Ethiopia G Gogrial West e G Tonj North e J Ayod L Aweil Centre Aweil Centre Leer Ayod u Mayendit r Tonj North R r iv e Tonj North e Tonj East Mayendit e J r L u Tonj East J h r t u Uror Akobo r R u Duk
i o Rum P R v bek N i e S orth a
v
Tonj East j
e r n h
Panyijiar n y
r t
Uror i o
u j Duk Wau i
P Akobo T a Duk o Akobo
a Uror r S
n
j Rumbek North Rum y be n k N i Pochalla o j rt o Cueibet Twic East h i
a Wau Rumbek Centre T Wau r Cueibet Yirol East Rumbek Centre Twic East Site Vs Host Pochalla
Cueibet Rumbek Centre Twic East Yirol East Pochalla Central African Republic Rumbek East h
t Rumbek East u
o Nagero
S Yirol East Bor South
j Bor South Yirol West
Central African Republic n Rumbek East Central African Republic Pibor o
T Yirol West Nagero Wulu Nagero Bor South Awerial a Yirol West Pibor Tambura r Pibor Wulu a Wulu z Mvolo Tambura N Awerial arrivals period a Awerial arrival period r Terekeka a Tambura r Location type a 2 000 a z
z Mvolo N Mvolo 5 000 N State Terekeka Terekeka i- returnee arrival 201 201 returnee individuals S Mundri East Lafon Kapoeta North b- IDP arrival 201 2015 individuals County Mundri East Ezo M i- returnee arrival 2018 (total) returnee individuals u Kapoeta East HC Mundri West n Ibba Maridi d b- IDP arrival 201 201 individuals Lafon r i M Mundri East Lafon Kapoeta North i- returnee arrival 2019 returnee individuals Ezo Kapoeta North W u Kapoeta East Yambio b- IDP arrival 2018 (total) individuals n Kapoeta East Ibba e Ezo d s Maridi r t Ibba i Maridi Juba W 0 b- IDP arrival 2019 individuals Yambio 0 Yambio e s Kapoeta South t Kapoeta South Juba 1 - 1 000 Juba 1 - 1 000 Yei Budi 0 L Torit Kapoeta South 1001 - 10 000 a Kenya 1 001 - 10 000 in Torit Torit y 1 - 1 000 Yei Ik Democratic Republic of Congo a I Yei o Community Setting 10 001 - 20 000 State I k Budi to k L ot 10 001 - 20 000 L s Budi o 1 001 - 10 000 a os a to in Kenya in Kenya K Magwi s y Democratic Republic of Congo y 20 001 - 30 000 ajo-ke Democratic Republic of Congo a a Magwi County ji Kilometers 10 001 - 20 000 20 001 - 30 000 Morobo Morobo 30 001 - 0 000 0 25 50 100 150 200 State Ka Uganda 20 001 - 30 000 jo-keji Magwi 30 001 - 0 000 Kajo-keji Kilometers Kilometers 0 001 - 130 000 Morobo 30 001 - 0 000 County Uganda 0 25 50 100 150 200 0 001 - 130 000 Uganda 0 25 50 100 150 200 0 001 - 130 000
CLICK TO ACCESS STATE LEVEL MAPS ON RETURNEE AND IDP LOCATIONS
Upper Nile
Unity Northern Bahr el Ghazal Western Bahr Warrap el Ghazal Jonglei
Lakes
Western Equatoria Central Eastern Equatoria Equatoria
DTM IS SUPPORTED BY For more information please contact [email protected] or visit displacement.iom.int/south-sudan
10