New Rights Tracker survey data on IDP rights maps COVID-19 pressures, highlighting less visible internal displacement situations

2020 was a challenging year for IDPs, with the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic adding to the difficulties they already faced, and millions being newly displaced by conflicts, disasters, development projects, evictions and more.
Published on June 17, 2021
Deborah Casalin | idrp

In its newly released 2021 Rights Tracker index, the Human Rights Measurement Initiative (HRMI) includes specific data on IDPs’ rights for the first time, drawn from its survey of primarily locally based human rights experts in 39 countries.[i] This new data provides a snapshot of pressures on IDPs’ rights during the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in the countries covered, as well as a window into a number of displacement situations which have remained under the global radar.

Taking a bird’s eye view of the Rights Tracker data on IDP rights, it can be seen that the rights of IDPs and host populations have been largely affected by similar pressures: economic and social rights issues are mainly linked to poverty, while restrictions on civil and political rights correlate with more general political repression. In a range of countries, respondents indicated that one or both types of pressures intensified in connection with the pandemic, as healthcare was stretched to the limit, schools and businesses shut down, and authoritarian states used emergency measures to restrict political activities and expression even further.

However, specific concerns over IDPs’ rights clearly came to the fore in countries with well-known, large-scale internal displacement situations resulting from violence and disasters. In the Democratic Republic of CongoMozambique and Mexico, over 50% of surveyed experts indicated that multiple economic and social rights of IDPs – such as health, housing, food, education and work – were under particular pressure.[ii] In Papua New Guinea – a country with a long-standing internal displacement situation that continued to grow in 2020  – experts also registered a high level of concern for IDPs’ rights, with almost half indicating that IDPs were less likely than other people to have enjoyed the rights to health, housing and food in 2020.

Even in countries where the level of particular risk to IDPs’ rights was not expressed as strongly, it was also evident that housing rights have been especially affected by COVID-19. The notes on housing rights metrics show that respondents in countries such as BrazilMalaysia and Nepal specifically highlighted evictions as a key human rights impact of the economic hardships brought about by the pandemic.

Another overall point of interest in the Rights Tracker data is that it highlights human rights experts’ concerns over IDP rights in a number of contexts, which are not typically addressed in global discussions on internal displacement. This includes smaller or less visible internal displacement situations such as those in Malaysia, FijiKiribati and Guam, as well as high-income economies such as Saudi Arabia and Taiwan. Internationally lesser-known situations of ongoing development-induced displacement were also raised, e.g. in Nepal and Taiwan. This indicates the breadth and variation of human rights practitioners’ understandings of internal displacement in different contexts.

As recently raised on the RLI blog by members of the Latin American Network on Internal Displacement and by Dr. Ana Mosneaga, internal displacement discourse and responses have tended to focus on conflict situations and on the global South, although international norms such as the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and human rights protections relating to forced eviction have a much wider scope. The perspectives of mainly in-country human rights experts, as expressed in the HRMI Rights Tracker data, are another welcome reminder to view internal displacement through a broad lens. As such, besides offering a useful resource for country and thematic research and an overview of human rights challenges during the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, the HRMI Rights Tracker’s new data is valuable as an entry point for understanding the state of IDP rights in contexts that are currently less globally visible.

HOW TO CONTRIBUTE

Researching Internal Displacement publishes engaging and insightful short pieces of writing, artistic and research outputs, policy briefings and think pieces on internal displacement.

We welcome contributions from academics, practitioners, researchers, officials, artists, poets, writers, musicians, dancers, postgraduate students and people affected by internal displacement.

By John Mussington | Dec 18, 2025
This short blog by a Barbudan community advocate examines how the Government of Antigua and Barbuda cynically forced the evacuation of Barbuda during Hurricane Irma in 2017 to make way for a luxury real estate development project catering to the exclusive private lifestyles of millionaires. Declaring the island ‘uninhabitable’, the government used threats and dubious legal procedures to confiscate all Barbudan land and prevent Barbudans from asserting their right to live on their land and island. Eight years on, Barbudans, led by community representatives and activists, continue their struggle. As the author notes, their challenges have strengthened the resolve of the people of Barbuda and helped forge alliances with other communities facing similar injustices.
By Nishara Fernando | Dec 4, 2025
This policy brief examines the forced and mostly failed relocation of members of coastal Sri Lankan communities following the 2004 tsunami that devastated parts of the country. In the aftermath of the tsunami, the Sri Lankan government decided to enforce a coastal buffer zone law that banned housing within proximity to the coastline, requiring residents in the buffer zone to vacate and move to poorly planned and constructed housing in ill-conceived relocation sites. As government and civil society organisations involved in the relocation gradually disengaged from the project, community members were left to fend for themselves amidst growing economic and social challenges associated with the relocation. As such, many families eventually returned to the buffer zone, exposing themselves to both legal and coastal hazard risks. This blog highlights how failure to involve communities in the planning and development of the relocation project has led to a second disaster for tsunami-affected communities – that of a poorly implemented planned relocation.
By Assma Jihad Awkal and Jasmin Lilian Diab | Nov 20, 2025
This short article spotlights what the authors introduce as “the feminization of recovery” of internally displaced communities in Lebanon's southern border with Israel, where women’s unpaid and unrecognized efforts sustain reconstruction in the absence of formal systems following the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah one year ago. The October 2023 conflict along Lebanon’s southern border displaced thousands, with female-headed households (FHHs) among the most affected. Returning after the ‘ceasefire,’ many women faced destroyed homes, scarce livelihoods, and gender norms privileging male breadwinners, all compounded by Lebanon’s refusal to recognize internally displaced persons (IDPs). Without legal acknowledgement or state support, women relied on informal networks, care work, and community solidarity to rebuild. Drawing on qualitative research (2023-2025), this commentary examines how FHHs transform survival into agency, turning daily labor and mutual support into the backbone of recovery. Recognizing their roles demands a policy shift from short-term aid to gender-sensitive livelihoods, housing repair, psychosocial support, and municipal funding that affirms women not as victims of war, but as architects of post-conflict renewal.