by Ava Strasser
Within two decades, Uganda has been regarded as both “the worst humanitarian crisis in the world” and “the world’s best place for refugees”. Through the lens of youth education, this research explores the response of the Ugandan government during periods of conflict and crisis to analyze how these contrasting realities can both be possible. (Photo credit: sita2 on Unsplash)
Introduction
Within two decades, Uganda has been regarded as both “the worst humanitarian crisis in the world” (Santner 94) and “the world’s best place for refugees” (Easton-Calabria). These statements sound remarkably contrasting. Understanding how they have come about within the same state over two decades may provide insight regarding the response of the Ugandan government during periods of conflict and crises. As will be further explored, these two statements lead to the question: how has the image of Uganda turned from one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world to one of the world’s best places for refugees?
Uganda has a history of responding to forced displacement towards both internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees. This history was “first documented during the formation of the modern state of Uganda in 1893” (Kamara et al. 445. The influx of displaced peoples has continued rising and falling across different periods in Uganda’s history. As such, Uganda has addressed IDPs and refugees at the local, national, and international levels. Understanding how the government of Uganda, in consultation with local and international actors, responds to ebbs and flows of forced displacement can provide insight to how policies have been developed and implemented over time and their effectiveness in addressing the lived experiences of those displaced. As the influx of refugees from abroad continues, comparing the national responses regarding youth education towards IDPs and refugees within Uganda offers important insights.
A History of Displacement
Since its colonial era, Uganda has seen periods of conflict internally and with its neighboring states. Further, while an entire timeline of this history is beyond the scope of this research, it is important to denote periods over the past two decades that have resulted in mass displacement and required responses to those seeking refuge within the country.
When former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland went to Uganda in 2003, he was confronted with a situation in which internal displacement rose to a total of nearly 2 million people due to fighting between the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Uganda People’s Defense Forces, primarily occurring in northern Uganda (Profile of Internal). Conflict within the country’s borders saw the number of IDPs rise dramatically within the early years of the decade, with many IDPs experiencing life in camps across the country. A 2005 report from the Norwegian Refugee Council stated that “living conditions in the camps [were] appalling, with…widespread lack of infrastructure and basic services, including schools, health care, and water and sanitation facilities” (Profile of Internal 7). These IDPs experienced periods of displacement, resettlement, and integration. As a result, responses from communities, NGOs, and the GoU became increasingly necessary.
While the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre reports that the number of those Ugandans displaced internally due to conflict and violence has declined over time (Internally Displaced Persons), the number of displaced from outside Uganda’s borders continues to rise. At the end of 2021, Uganda was home to more than 1.5 million refugees, primarily from South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, and Burundi (Uganda Comprehensive). This makes Uganda one of the largest refugee-hosting countries in both Africa and the world (Uganda National Action 1). The government has stated that:
“[T]he mass influx of refugees…has put enormous pressure on the country’s basic service provision, in particular health and education services. Refugees share all social services with the local host communities. The refugee hosting districts are among the least developed districts in the country, and thus the additional refugee population is putting a high strain on already limited resources” (Education Response Plan 9).
This research explores the pressure that refugees and host communities experience, as well as the government response to the influx of refugees.
Looking Towards Youth Education
Since its colonial era, Uganda has seen periods of conflict internally and with its neighboring states. Further, while an entire timeline of this history is beyond the scope of this research, it is important to denote periods over the past two decades that have resulted in mass displacement and required responses to those seeking refuge within the country.
When former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland went to Uganda in 2003, he was confronted with a situation in which internal displacement rose to a total of nearly 2 million people due to fighting between the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Uganda People’s Defense Forces, primarily occurring in northern Uganda (Profile of Internal). Conflict within the country’s borders saw the number of IDPs rise dramatically within the early years of the decade, with many IDPs experiencing life in camps across the country. A 2005 report from the Norwegian Refugee Council stated that “living conditions in the camps [were] appalling, with…widespread lack of infrastructure and basic services, including schools, health care, and water and sanitation facilities” (Profile of Internal 7). These IDPs experienced periods of displacement, resettlement, and integration. As a result, responses from communities, NGOs, and the GoU became increasingly necessary.
While the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre reports that the number of those Ugandans displaced internally due to conflict and violence has declined over time (Internally Displaced Persons), the number of displaced from outside Uganda’s borders continues to rise. At the end of 2021, Uganda was home to more than 1.5 million refugees, primarily from South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, and Burundi (Uganda Comprehensive). This makes Uganda one of the largest refugee-hosting countries in both Africa and the world (Uganda National Action 1). The government has stated that:
“[T]he mass influx of refugees…has put enormous pressure on the country’s basic service provision, in particular health and education services. Refugees share all social services with the local host communities. The refugee hosting districts are among the least developed districts in the country, and thus the additional refugee population is putting a high strain on already limited resources” (Education Response Plan 9).
This research explores the pressure that refugees and host communities experience, as well as the government response to the influx of refugees.
Looking Towards Youth Education
Youth education assists in understanding the changes of the government response towards forced displacement over time. During periods of emergency, including conflict and displacement, education has been regarded as providing “immediate physical and psychosocial protection, as well as life-saving knowledge and skills”that “can equip [children] to face on-going crises as well as crises to come” (Shohel 105).
The government has stated that “[e]ducation is an essential enabler to break the vulnerability created by conflict and displacement” (Education Response Plan 2). Due to the cited importance of education during periods of conflict and crises, understanding the development and implementation of education policy towards those forcibly displaced shows how communities and states respond to conflict and how resilience is built into institutions. This is important since “peacebuilding emphasizes transformative social change that is accomplished,” in part, “through the development of resilient institutions and social processes that allow conflict to be resolved through political, rather than violent, means” (Peacebuilding 2.0 12).
Looking at the response towards the education of displaced youth by the government will further our understanding of the capacity for positive peace, which addresses the structures that underlie conflict contexts and transform relationships (Galtung).
Response to IDPs
Many IDPs, particularly in northern Uganda, were forced to leave their homes due to ongoing internal conflict. Northern Uganda experienced waves of violent conflict from 1986 to 2006 (Corbin & Omona), with the number of those forcibly displaced in northern and eastern Uganda reaching estimates of 2 million (Profile of Internal 85). Educational systems in Uganda suffered as a result of the conflict (Corbin & Omona), with youth IDPs experiencing these consequences directly. A 2007 report conducted by the Women’s Refugee Commission found through interviews that young people saw education as “their primary concern, and the solution to many [of the] challenges they face” (Listening to Youth 8). Thus, community and national responses to the rising numbers of displaced were required, including through education opportunities, with most discussions of challenges and recommendations were produced from 2002 to 2010. Looking at the response of the GOU to mass displacement and its challenges offers valuable insights into how this response was adapted with the onset of refugee crises from outside the country’s borders in the latter half of the decade.
Major challenges include government policies that ineffectively addressed structural inequalities, effects of the conflict on infrastructure pertinent to attending school and fostering livelihood, high levels of dropout and absenteeism, and concerns regarding sustainability. The government is a party to international agreements, including the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and the 2008 Kampala Convention, and has adopted policies towards IDPs, including the 2004 National Policy on IDPs and the 2007 Peace, Recovery, and Development Plan for Northern Uganda (PRDP) (Kamara et al. 466).
Of particular interest to the IDP situation in northern Uganda is the PRDP. The plan called for bringing the Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES), local governments, and communities into education planning and recommended developing strategies for addressing high dropout rates, “classroom construction and expansion,” teacher support, and providing routes for alternative education (Peace, Recovery 66). However, scattered implementation of such government policies have resulted in varying degrees of success.
An additional component of the government response that has received significant attention is the Universal Primary Education (UPE) policy implemented by the government in 1997 and reaffirmed in 2003. The cited implementation challenges of UPE include the “prohibitive” lack of access to schooling due to fees for materials, uniforms, and more (Cheney 85). Further, UPE funds were often “diverted by the local government” (Education and Fragility 25). These problems were exacerbated during the transition from primary to secondary schooling, as many living within the camps dropped out before reaching secondary schooling (“Displaced Youth”). The problems with UPE have been documented and reflect the challenges posed to the connection between the local, district, and national levels of governance and people’s lived experiences.
Recognizing the insecurity students faced in traveling to and from IDP camps for school (Listening to Youth), the government created “learning centers” in the camps (Education and Fragility 6). However, learning centers lacked “basic hygiene…[and having] collapsed school management systems…inadequate instructional materials…[and] widespread trauma among students, teachers and parents” (Education and Fragility 6). In response, recommendations for addressing the challenges and insecurities that IDP youth faced centered around calls for addressing the lack of infrastructure of schools and learning centers for the benefit of both students and teachers, with a focus on hygiene infrastructure so women and girls would be able to access educational opportunities (Education and Fragility). Thus, the difficulty of providing parallel educational opportunities to displaced youth living within camps to fulfill national policies has been widely documented, indicating the need to strengthen the system as a whole.
Absenteeism is another problem. “The total enrollments of pupils [fluctuated] in pace with variable degrees of insecurity at any given time” (Education and Fragility 6). This is particularly true for those who had to commute to reach school facilities, as well as those who were forced out of school due to conflict, displacement, and abduction into armed fighting. Their education was heavily disrupted and many found themselves unable to return to school (Listening to Youth). Young people interviewed by the Women’s Refugee Commission in 2007 recommended increased and sustained support to communities experiencing conflict and displacement; support in achieving “the highest level of formal education possible, which will require catch-up classes” for those unable to attend school for protracted periods; and opportunities for young people to “participate in decision-making” (Listening to Youth 4). This indicates that displaced youth were acutely aware of the problems they faced, with national policies and actions insufficiently addressing students’ lived experiences. Additional problems were “[t]eacher absenteeism, dropout, retention” due to insecurity and correlated with “the quality of infrastructure in schools” (Crespo Cuaresma and Raggl 408). The lack of female teachers also heavily affects the ability of displaced girls to attend schools (Education and Fragility). Greater attention to the needs of the whole community of students, teachers, and families, would be required to address such problems.
The models for learning implemented by the government, grassroots, and international organizations, all running simultaneously in the region, led to questions of sustainability. With these actors operating in parallel capacities without clear coordination, a “culture of dependency” arose due to those within the camps relying on humanitarian aid and a lack of donor investment in “longer-term projects that increase self-reliance” (Listening to Youth 12). Additionally, “past experience of ‘targeting’ returnees or other categories of people for services…contributed to stigmatization,” resulting in a clear need for “inclusive programming to reduce tension and discrimination in local communities” (Listening to Youth 2). These practices reflected a greater need for coordination and attentiveness to strengthening systems that would outlive the immediate response to conflict and displacement.
The challenges documented in the aftermath of major periods of internal displacement indicate that future conflicts and crises must adapt to address the lived experiences of those forcibly displaced and promote the sustainable practices of citizens, communities, and the state through educational attainment. Learning from these challenges is paramount since the “insufficient capacity of the government to provide basic services necessary to the functioning of education is a threat to the perceived legitimacy of the government and thus a cause of fragility and conflict, especially during the rebuilding phase” (Education and Fragility 25). In a country that has dealt with ongoing crises and conflict, addressing such challenges would be necessary for increasing capacities for resilience and peace for the state and individuals within communities.
Response to Refugees
Today, the government is faced with responding to the ongoing refugee movement as millions have resettled in Uganda from outside the country’s borders. Further, the government states that the current refugee crisis within the country should be “considered as a ‘children’s crisis’ where 61% of the total refugee population are estimated to be children under the age of 18 years old” (Education Response Plan 2). Many refugees are resettled into host communities, which have continuously felt the strain on their resources (Comprehensive 19). Thus, understanding the government response of adopting multiple policies relating to refugee youth education and host communities is increasingly important as the crisis continues.
The government passed the Refugee Act of 2006 as well as the 2010 Refugee Regulations, which allow “refugees access to key rights, including freedom of movement and the right to work” and maintain “open borders, non-camp policies, [and] integration of refugees” (Uganda National Action 38). As such, refugees “receive at least the same treatment accorded to aliens generally in similar circumstances relating to… education, other than elementary education for which refugees must receive the same treatment as nationals” (The Refugees Act 18). This situates local integration, with support to both refugee and host communities, and self-reliance as major aspects of the national policy towards refugees. In particular, self-reliance responds to one of the major challenges of the “culture of dependency,” a challenge arising from the reliance of IDPs on humanitarian assistance in education throughout the early 2000s (Listening to Youth 12). This creates an important foundation for understanding additional key policies developed by the government.
Further policies, such as the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) of 2019 and the Education Response Plan for Refugee and Host Communities in Uganda (ERP) of 2018, have been developed to strengthen the national response towards refugee and host communities. The CRRF calls for the development of “comprehensive sector plans in education, health, jobs and livelihoods, and water and environment” and calls on the international community to aid in “investment, financing, material and technical assistance” where needed (Uganda National Action 39). The policy calls for the involvement of the MoES in strengthening the national response towards refugee and host communities (Uganda National Action). The CRRF indicates that national policy has become more aligned with the key challenges of limited policy development and implementation within the response to IDPs in the early 2000s by strengthening local and district-level involvement. Further, the creation of the CRRF Steering Committee to oversee the achievement of the identified measures brings together “Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies, international bilateral and multilateral partners, international and local NGOs, the private sector… host communities” and refugee communities through the Refugee Engagement Forum (Uganda National Action 13; Uganda Global). This addresses, in part, the “insufficient consultation with affected communities, who are not only the beneficiaries of a self-reliance [program] but also its agents,” that challenged previous efforts (Uganda Global). The CRRF emphasizes that consultation with refugee and host communities is prioritized within the currently implemented educational response.
In calling for a comprehensive response led by the MoES, the CRRF oversaw the development of the ERP of 2018. This is the most comprehensive policy towards youth education for refugee and host communities developed by the government. This policy consists of outputs and targeted measures that respond to challenges identified throughout the IDP youth education response period. The MoES identified successes of the targeted measures of the ERP by 2019, which include increasing numbers of refugee enrollment in primary education, the “construction of 617 classrooms,” the training of 618 teachers, and local government and “refugee-inclusive planning and budgeting” (Education Response Plan Secretariat 2). Further, an Accelerated Education curriculum has been created (Education Response Plan Secretariat), which responds to calls for addressing absenteeism of students who missed schooling due to conflict and displacement and may also reflect the need to reduce stigmatization as services are provided to all within the host community. These policies reflect the recognition that addressing these challenges has required a whole-of-government response at the local, district, and national levels, in consultation and with support from affected communities and international actors.
The success of the ERP reflects that the current policies have addressed the challenges of education for IDPs from the early 2000s. These policies attempt to address the most significant challenges faced by the national response to education provision for IDPs, as identified above: structural inequalities that lead to the inability of many students to attend school, lack of infrastructure, high levels of absenteeism, and the sustainability of response. Today, districts and government offices are involved in planning, instilling a sense of ownership at the national level. Communities and the government are less dependent on humanitarian and international organizations, creating conditions for the sustainable capacity of the government and those responsible for ensuring educational opportunities for youth within Uganda by thinking of longer-term solutions.
However, key challenges of the national response identified by actors within the state in the early 2000s remain. Limitations for access to education beyond the primary level remain (Inter-Agency) partly due to the inability to pay material and tuition fees, particularly in rural settings (An Assessment). In addition, the Ugandan National NGO Forum reports that corruption remains and has many effects on delivering public services, including education (“Dignity”). These challenges reflect the government’s limitations in providing educational opportunities.
Further, new challenges have arisen. Due to the increasing number of refugees from francophone countries, “the study curriculum, instruction language, and materials present a challenge because refugees come from countries with quite different educational environments” (An Assessment 31). Additionally, many lack documents from their home country that are pertinent to furthering their education in Uganda (Uganda National Action). These challenges are unique to the situation of refugees resettling in Uganda. Future policy development and implementation should enhance efforts to respond to such issues as they arise. Moreover, covid-19 has posed new challenges as schools have closed and entry of refugees at the border has been restricted (Inter-Agency; “Dignity”). The government response post-covid will be indicative of the strength of previously established policies and institutions.
Further, there are limited calls for the involvement of youth in decision-making that affects their lives, an important recommendation given in 2007 by IDP youth themselves. This hampers the ability of refugee and host community youth to participate in the decisions that affect them. These policies may benefit from their inclusion in discussion and implementation. While substantial progress has been made in refugee and host community education in Uganda, challenges remain that limit the ability of all youth to access opportunities for the betterment of their livelihoods.
Conclusion
Uganda has experienced a history of conflict and displacement. The national response to these crises is important in understanding the capacity of the state to build resilience into its institutions, a key feature of enhancing peacefulness within societies. It is worth noting that, as a senior official with the U.N. said, “[t]his is a very critical moment for northern Uganda and there are discrepancies between the political, public discourse and the reality on the ground” (Listening to Youth 14). While looking at the government’s policies offers insight, it does not provide the entire picture, which challenges the formulation of an understanding of how resilience is built into educational institutions and the country’s capacity for peace.
Regardless, looking at the challenges of the early 2000s of the national response towards the education of IDP youth and seeing how current policies have adapted to address structural inequalities and limitations is crucial to addressing future challenges and policy in Uganda. The challenges of structural inequality, infrastructure, absenteeism, questions of sustainability, and longer-term solutions that arose out of the national response in the early 2000s have contributed to a certain extent to the current government response to the influx of refugees. While challenges remain to be addressed, national commitment to the policies in place and international support will be crucial to ensuring that the youth within Uganda have access to opportunities to better themselves and their societies.
*******
Ava Strasser is a second-year master’s student at NYU’s Center for Global Affairs pursuing a degree in Global Affairs with a concentration in Peacebuilding. Her research interests include the participation of displaced women and girls in peace processes and the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda. She previously interned with local non-profit organizations supporting the resettlement of refugees and asylum seekers in Michigan and the United Nations Security Sector Reform Unit and has experience working in Lira, Uganda, and Lesbos, Greece.
Bibliography
An Assessment of Uganda’s Progressive Approach to Refugee Management. The World Bank Group, 2016.
Cheney, K. Pillars of the Nation: Child Citizens and Ugandan National Development. University of Chicago Press, 2008.
Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework Uganda: The Way Forward. UNHCR Uganda, October 2017.
Corbin, J. N., & Omona, J. “Community-Based Intervention to Strengthen Family and Community Relationships in Post-Conflict Nwoya and Gulu Districts in Northern Uganda.” Social Development Issues (Social Development Issues), vol. 42, no. 2, 2020, 1–13.
Crespo Cuaresma, J., & Raggl, A. “The Dynamics of Returns to Education in Uganda: National and Subnational Trends.” Development Policy Review, vol. 34, no. 3, 2016, 385–422.
“Dignity, Solidarity, Shared Prosperity: 2022 Civil Society New Year’s Message.” Uganda National NGO Forum, 17 January 2022.
“Displaced Youth: The Challenges of Displacement, The Challenges of Return.” The New Humanitarian, 23 February 2007.
Easton-Calabria, E. “Uganda has a Remarkable History of Hosting Refugees, but Its Efforts are Underfunded.” The Conversation, 26 August 2021.
Galtung, J. “A mini theory of peace.” Galtung-Institut, 4 January 2007.
Inter-Agency Revised Uganda Country Refugee Response Plan (July 2020 – December 2021). United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 8 February 2021.
Internally Displaced Persons, Total Displaced by Conflict and Violence (number of people) – Uganda. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre & World Bank Group.
Kamara, J. K., Cyril, S., & Renzaho, A. M. N. “The Social and Political Dimensions of Internal Displacement in Uganda: Challenges and Opportunities – A Systematic Review.” African Studies, vol. 76, no. 3, 2017, 444–473.
Listening to Youth: The Experiences of Young People in Northern Uganda. Women’s Refugee Commission, July 2007.
Peacebuilding 2.0: Mapping the Boundaries of an Expanding Field. Alliance for Peacebuilding, 2012.
Profile of Internal Displacement: Uganda. Norwegian Refugee Council & Global IDP Project, 10 August 2005.
Santner, F. “Uganda’s Policy for Internally Displaced Persons: A Comparison with the Colombian Regulations on Internal Displacement.” International Law, vol. 22, 2013, 87–120.
Shohel, M. M. C. “Education in Emergencies: Challenges of Providing Education for Rohingya Children Living in Refugee Camps in Bangladesh.” Education Inquiry, vol. 13, no. 1, 2022, 104–126. https://doi-org.proxy.library.nyu.edu/10.1080/20004508.2020.1823121
Uganda. Peace, Recovery and Development Plan for Northern Uganda (PRDP). September 2007, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Uganda_PRDP-2007.pdf
Uganda. The Refugees Act. 2006, https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4b7baba52.pdf
Uganda. Uganda National Action Plan to Implement the Global Compact on Refugees and its Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) 2018-2020: Uganda’s Revised CRRF Roadmap. 2019, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjWk-mhmaP2AhUGJt8KHVMNATgQFnoECAUQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata2.unhcr.org%2Fen%2Fdocuments%2Fdownload%2F74394&usg=AOvVaw2KRn5scqS4PEguBxVGxF3p
Uganda Comprehensive Refugee Response Portal. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
Uganda, Ministry of Education and Sports. Education Response Plan for Refugees and Host Communities in Uganda. 2018 September, https://www.edu-links.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Education-Response-Plan-for-Refugees-and-Host-Communities-in-Uganda_Fina.._.pdf
Uganda, Ministry of Education and Sports. The Education Response Plan (ERP) Secretariat for Refugees and Host Communities in Uganda Ministry of Education and Sports September 2018 – 2021. 2019, https://www.education.go.ug/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ERP-Overview-1.pdf
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2021, March 15). Uganda Global Compact on Refugees Digital Platform. https://globalcompactrefugees.org/article/uganda
United States, Agency for International Development. Education and Fragility in Northern Uganda. 2008 October, https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadz725.pdf
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.