United Nations A/77/182

General Assembly Distr.: General

18 July 2022

Original: English

Seventy-seventh session
Item 69 (b) of the provisional agenda*
Promotion and protection of human rights: human
rights questions, including alternative approaches for
improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and
fundamental freedoms

Human rights of internally displaced persons

Note by the Secretary-General

The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the General Assembly the
report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons,
Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 76/167 and
Human Rights Council resolution 50/6.

* A/77/150.

22-11231 (E) 010822

*2211231*
A/77/182

Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of

internally displaced persons, Cecilia Jimenez-Damary

Summary
In the present report, the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally
displaced persons, Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, provides reflections on her mandate at
the end of her six-year tenure.
In the thematic section of the report, the Special Rapporteur examines the issue
of development-induced displacement. She outlines the human rights challenges
faced by persons displaced by development projects and identifies systemic
challenges in the development space that may lead to arbitrary displacement and
infringement of the human rights of those displaced. The Special Rapporteur makes
recommendations to States, development actors, the international community, civil
society and national human rights institutions.

2/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

I. Introduction
1. The present report is submitted to the General Assembly by the Special
Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Cecilia Jimenez -
Damary, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 76/167 and Human Rights Council
resolution 50/6. In the first part of the present report, the Special Rapporteur provides
reflections on her six-year tenure at the end of her term. In the second part, she
examines the phenomenon of displacement by development projects and its impact
on the human rights of those displaced.

II. Reflections of the Special Rapporteur on her tenure

2. The Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons
considers it to be a special privilege to have held the mandate for the past six years
and thereby served as an advocate for the human rights of one of the most vulnerable
groups caught in conflict, violence and human-caused and natural disasters in many
countries of the world. She likewise expresses her gratitude to many Member States
and their respective Governments, regional organizations, United Nations agencies,
civil society and faith-based organizations, human rights entities, including national
human rights institutions, and academic and capacity-building bodies for the
numerous opportunities she has had to engage with them to contribute to enhancing
their responsibilities and work to protect the human rights of internally displaced
persons.
3. Since her assumption of the mandate in November 2016, she has embarked on
the arduous task of building on the immense standard-setting legacy of her
predecessors in the mandate, in particular in the development and dissemination of a
substantive body of international human rights and humanitarian standards set out in
the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) and the
Inter-Agency Standing Committee Framework on Durable Solutions for Internally
Displaced Persons (A/HRC/13/21/Add.4), as well as the African Union Convention
for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala
Convention) – the only regional binding treaty on the protection of internally
displaced persons. In her first report to the Human Rights Council, in which she
described her road map and strategy for the mandate (A/HRC/35/27), the Special
Rapporteur specified her objectives of focusing on the implementation of those
standards by consistently adopting a human rights-based approach, conducting
coordinated advocacy for the rights of internally displaced persons, and raising
awareness of neglected drivers of internal displacement and of specific vulnerable
groups among internally displaced persons. The road map that the Special Rapporteur
implemented was based on a series of stakeholder consultations with Member States
and their various State and intergovernmental entities, United Nations agencies, and
civil society organizations, as well as with the two previous holders of the mandate,
Walter Kaelin and Chaloka Beyani. The Special Rapporteur remains indebted to them
for their advice and constructive engagement. She shares the following reflections on
her six-year term.
4. The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement as the basis for
implementation of the protection of internally displaced persons. Since its
creation just under three decades ago, the work carried out under the mandate of the
Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons has quickly
evolved from mainly standard setting, which eventually produced the Guiding
Principles on Internal Displacement and other standards, to the more encompassing
work of promotion and advocacy, and of mainstreaming the human rights of internally
displaced persons in the work of the United Nations and the international community.

22-11231 3/24
A/77/182

Marking the twentieth anniversary of the Guiding Principles, the Special Rapporteur,
the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, with the endorsement of Austria,
Honduras and Uganda, launched the three-year Plan of Action for Advancing
Prevention, Protection and Solutions for Internally Displaced People 2018–2020, also
known as the GP20 plan of action, which galvanized the international community to
support the responsibility of States for the rights of internally displaced persons,
firmly on the basis of international human rights standards and international
humanitarian standards. 1
5. While standard setting on the rights of internally displaced persons continues,
the emphasis is now placed more on the national and local levels, where States express
their primary responsibility for the protection of internally displaced persons by
adopting legislative or policy frameworks for accountability regarding their
international obligations. For this momentous task, the international community
should continue to lend its support to States through capacity-building and the
provision of technical expertise. The Special Rapporteur thanks those States and
stakeholders who are contributing to such law and policy initiatives at the State level
and ensuring that they comply with international law. The Special Rapporteur
recommends enhancing this stream, in particular through the Global Protection
Cluster Task Team on Law and Policy and its work with lawmakers, especially in
countries that host internally displaced persons, including the incorporation of the
Kampala Convention into national law in African Member States. The Special
Rapporteur further reminds all concerned of the importance of the participation of
internally displaced persons in the various processes involved.
6. The primary responsibility of States in the prevention of internal
displacement, the protection of internally displaced persons and solutions to
internal displacement. While much has been said about the primary responsibility
of States, with extensive elaboration on this subject by the previous mandate holders
and in the project on internal displacement conducted by the Brookings Institution,
the implementation of State responsibility on the basis of States’ sovereignty has been
rich in practice in many States, but also dire in others. In addition to the enactment
and implementation of laws and policies on the rights of internally displaced persons,
good practices have emerged in a number of countries concerning State governance,
institution-building and practice on internal displacement. The report of the Special
Rapporteur’s predecessor on positive practices, governance structures and
institutional arrangements for preventing and managing responses to the different
stages of internal displacement (A/70/334) was followed up by the publication of a
compilation of national practices in the context of the GP20 plan of action. 2 All of the
examples of efforts provided in these documents – carried out through the work of
executive, legislative and judicial branches of government – have shown that the
assumption by States of their primary responsibility is concrete and deserves
international support.
7. Meanwhile, on the issue of data and displacement, the Special Rapporteur is
encouraged by developments supported by her predecessor, and which she has
continued to support, with regard to States undertaking primary responsibility for the
monitoring of internal displacement and the generation of much-needed data and
statistics in their countries. With the support of the mandate holder, United Nations
agencies and civil society organizations, the exercise of profiling situations of internal
displacement has been enhanced with the provision to States of more systematic
__________________
1
Available at [Link]/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IDPersons/
[Link].
2
Hannah Entwisle Chapuisat, Working Together Better to Prevent, Address and Find Durable
Solutions to Internal Displacement: GP20 Compilation of National Practices (2020).

4/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

international technical expertise through the Joint Internally Displaced Person

Profiling Service. Moreover, the Statistical Commission provided a much-needed
institutional context for efforts by the mandate holder, United Nations agencies and
national statistics offices in numerous countries to facilitate the generation at the
national level of official internally displaced persons statistics. In 2020, the Expert
Group on Refugee and Internally Displaced Persons Statistics finalized the
International Recommendations on Internally Displaced Persons Statistics, in which
it provided an internationally agreed framework for countries and international
organizations to improve the production, coordination and dissemination of high-
quality official statistics on internally displaced persons that are consistent over time
and comparable among regions and countries. The Special Rapporteur is encouraged
by these developments, as they contribute to the State practice of taking responsibility
for actional data on internally displaced persons. 3 The challenge now is to implement
those recommendations.
8. The essential nature of the participation of internally displaced persons and
affected populations. Since the submission of the Special Rapporteur’s very first
report to the General Assembly, in which she focused on the participation of internally
displaced persons in decisions affecting them (A/72/202), a broader consensus and
integration of this principle have been undertaken at many levels inside and outside
the United Nations. The message is clear – the effectiveness of any intervention or
support for solutions to internal displacement can be sustained only with an internall y
displaced person-centred approach that enables such persons to take control of their
lives and substantively decide on their futures. The Special Rapporteur is particularly
pleased that the ensuing efforts of the Secretary-General through his action agenda
on internal displacement 4 have consistently incorporated the principle of the
participation of internally displaced persons and emphasized their political agency,
especially as citizens of the State. Indeed, the right to participation encompasses many
aspects that are firmly rooted in international human rights law, from the prevention
of arbitrary internal displacement to the protection of displaced persons during their
displacement, and in efforts to attain durable solutions. This is a necessary mindset
shift away from regarding internally displaced persons as mere beneficiaries of
humanitarian assistance and towards a more proactive engagement and involvement
of internally displaced persons as agents in their own right.
9. One significant process that is slowly gaining traction among many States and
is supported by civil society and United Nations agencies is an attention to the
political participation of internally displaced persons and their rights to vote in
elections and to stand for election. In order to encourage further concrete
implementation of the right of participation of internally displaced persons, the
Special Rapporteur elaborated on these political rights in her final report to the
Human Rights Council (A/HRC/50/24). The Special Rapporteur further contends that
the work of furthering the participation of internally displaced persons remains
unfinished and must be further enhanced through law and policy, governance
structures, and programme conceptualization, implementation and evaluation at the
ground level, with the participation of the affected populations in all their diversity.
10. The centrality of protection based on international human rights standards.
The Special Rapporteur articulates her advocacy work on mainstreaming the human
rights of internally displaced persons in the United Nations through her membership
in the Inter-Agency Standing Committee and her engagement with various United
Nations agencies and entities. At the time of drafting the present report, the Standing
__________________
3
European Union and United Nations, International Recommendations on Internally Displaced
Persons Statistics, (Luxembourg, 2020), available at [Link]/jips-publication/international-
recommendations-on-internally-displaced-persons-statistics-iris-2020/.
4
Available at [Link]/en/content/action-agenda-on-internal-displacement/.

22-11231 5/24
A/77/182

Committee is currently undertaking various reviews of United Nations policies on the

centrality of protection in humanitarian action 5 as well as on protection in
humanitarian responses to internally displaced persons. Moreover, the United Nations
and various stakeholders are attempting to weave a protection lens 6 into the Secretary-
General’s call to action for human rights 7 as it applies to policy, strategic and
operational priorities of the United Nations. All of these efforts must succeed if the
United Nations system is to implement effectively the human rights pillar of the
Charter of the United Nations and ensure that human rights are an essential
component in the humanitarian, development and peace nexus relating to internally
displaced persons. The concept of centrality of protection is a crucial aspect in the
delivery of humanitarian, development and peace policies and programmes in the
field. The Special Rapporteur insists that the implementation of a hum an rights-based
approach, based on international law, remains crucial to the prevention of arbitrary
displacement and to ensuring protection and solutions. Technical and programmatic
approaches alone cannot work without the political conditions that will e ventually
lead to social cohesion, economic sovereignty and political acceptance for internally
displaced persons and their integration into mainstream societies, underpinned by
human rights standards.
11. Throughout her term, the Special Rapporteur has placed a special emphasis on
the prevention of arbitrary internal displacement in the context of conflict and
violence, as elaborated on in her report to the General Assembly ( A/76/169), in which
she dissects the obligations of States to ensure, through a human rights-based
approach, that internal displacement is avoided, or at least that its dire consequences
to their own populations are minimized. The theme of prevention was also echoed in
the report of the High-level Panel on Internal Displacement entitled “Shining a light
on internal displacement: a vision for the future”. 8 In the above-mentioned report of
the Special Rapporteur, she pointed out that there was an increasing gravity and
intensity to internal displacement situations worldwide and that the number of
internally displaced persons indicated an urgent need for States to dedicate increased
efforts to preventing arbitrary displacement. Adopting a human rights-based approach
to the prevention of arbitrary displacement does not mean, however, preventing
people from moving. Liberty of movement and freedom to choose one’s residence are
rights protected under international human rights law, and displacement can have a
protective nature and prevent other harm and human rights violations, in particular in
situations where people leave their homes or places of habitual residence in search of
safety. Instead, preventive measures must focus on addressing the conditions that lead
to displacement and on protecting people from being forced to leave their homes, in
line with international standards. Taking measures to prevent crises and conflict are
essential to prevent the conditions leading to displacement. With increased awareness
that prevention of arbitrary displacement is a necessity not merely to reduce the
numbers of internally displaced persons in compliance with international law, but also
to contribute to the cohesion of societies, good governance and solutions, the Special
Rapporteur encourages Member States and the international community to ensure that
prevention is embedded in their policies and programmes on internal displacement in
all its phases.
__________________
5
Inter-Agency Standing Committee, “Statement on the centrality of protection in humanitarian
action”, available at [Link]
committee/iasc-principals-statement-centrality-protection-humanitarian-action-2013.
6
See, for example, International Peace Institute, “The UN agenda for protection: policy, strategic,
and operational priorities”, March 2022, available at [Link]/2022/03/the-un-agenda-for-
protection-policy-strategic-and-operational-priorities.
7
Available at [Link]/en/content/action-for-human-rights/[Link].
8
High-level Panel on Internal Displacement, “Shining a light on internal displacement: a vi sion
for the future”, 2021, available at [Link]

6/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

12. In her road map, the Special Rapporteur also stated the importance of raising
awareness on some neglected drivers of internal displacement. In one of her reports
to the General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur discussed internal displacement in
the context of the slow-onset adverse effects of climate change (A/75/207), which
was a much-needed discussion on a lesser-known cause of climate-induced internal
displacement, as more attention is usually directed to displacement caused by the
more dramatic sudden-onset drivers of climate-induced displacement. There is now
extensive evidence of the widespread impacts of climate change on the enjoyment of
human rights, such as the rights to life, health, housing, food, water and education,
and on cultural rights and collective rights, including the rights of indigenous peoples
and the right to self-determination. In that report, the Special Rapporteur contended
that movement or mobility owing to slow-onset adverse effects of climate change
might not be entirely voluntary or forced, but rather that it fell somewhere on a
continuum between the two, with varying degrees of voluntariness and constraint.
However, in cases where voluntariness is absent, such mobility would fall squarely
within the notion of forced displacement, in accordance with the definition of internally
displaced persons set out in the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. In view
of what is now commonly accepted to be a “climate emergency”, the Special
Rapporteur enjoins the international community to build on the practices in disaster
risk mitigation and reduction to create a more comprehensive response to the rights
of those displaced by climate change by, for example, further examining the potential
for loss and damages affecting displaced peoples.
13. Another driver of internal displacement is “development-based” or
“development-induced” displacement. While recognizing the significant benefits that
development projects often bring to societies more widely, especially those in less
developed countries, questions remain as to the appropriate criteria and parameters to
be applied in cases where development could lead to internal displacement. The
present report attempts to respond to these issues with a human rights lens regar ding
the protection of internally displaced persons.
14. The Special Rapporteur hopes that the implementation of the Secretary-
General’s recently launched action agenda on internal displacement and the future
work of his Special Adviser on Solutions to Internal Displacement will contribute to
these much-needed outcomes, so that solutions are primarily focused on the
attainment by internally displaced persons of their human rights. The Special
Rapporteur reiterates her welcome 9 of the commitment, as stated in the action agenda
on internal displacement, to drive forward the implementation of human rights as a
key step in preventing displacement crises and ensuring better protection and
assistance for internally displaced persons and host communities, with protection and
human rights remaining at the heart of the work of the United Nations.
15. With regard to solutions, the Special Rapporteur has consistently supported the
dissemination and implementation of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Framework
on Durable Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons (A/HRC/13/21/Add.4). In the
Framework, the Standing Committee elaborates eight criteria for the attainment of
durable solutions, which further stress the centrality of protection and are based on
human rights standards. Attempts have been made to ensure that these criteria are
accessible in policy and in practice through the elaboration of indicators, in particular
through an inter-agency durable solutions project 10 initiated by the Joint Internally
__________________
9
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, “UN Secretary -General’s
action agenda on internal displacement: time to lead by example, UN expert says”, 27 June 2022,
available at [Link]/en/press-releases/2022/06/un-secretary-generals-action-agenda-
internal-displacement-time-lead-example.
10
Further information on the project is available at [Link]/tools-and-guidance/durable-
solutions-indicators-guide/.

22-11231 7/24
A/77/182

Displaced Person Profiling Service, in cooperation with the mandate holder’s

predecessor and launched during the term of the current Special Rapporteur. The
Special Rapporteur has determined that these criteria are neither fully appreciated nor
complied with when interpreted on the basis of international human rights law, in
particular by humanitarian and development providers in the field. As indicated in the
report of the High-level Panel on Internal Displacement entitled “Shining a light on
internal displacement: a vision for the future”, there is an imperative need for durable
solutions for internally displaced persons, and the fact that internal displacement is
still primarily viewed as a humanitarian issue is a key part of this problem. While in
its report the Panel emphasizes the role of development in durable solutions, it also
adds that the protection and the safety, security and rights of internally displaced
persons should guide all aspects of the solutions approach. The Special Rapporteur
emphasizes that the implementation of solutions, on the basis of human rights
standards, must include host communities and must adopt a systems-wide and area-
based approach. 11
16. One particular element of solutions for internally displaced persons that is
slowly starting to attract concrete attention is the criteria for access to remedies. The
Inter-Agency Standing Committee Framework on Durable Solutions for Internally
Displaced Persons (A/HRC/13/21/Add.4) includes the widely misunderstood and
neglected concept and practice of transitional justice for internally displaced persons.
The Special Rapporteur has engaged on this issue during her term in a number of
countries, some of which have robust, legislated transitional justice reparations
programmes for internally displaced persons, while others are considering
implementing such programmes. The Special Rapporteur, in her report presented to
the General Assembly on transitional justice in the context of internal displacement
(A/73/173), elaborates on transitional justice as part of solutions for internally
displaced persons and firmly establishes internally displaced persons as victims of
human rights violations or breaches of international humanitarian law. The Special
Rapporteur encourages further work on this issue and recommends that the current,
primary focus of transitional justice for internally displaced persons on housing, land
and property rights (see A/HRC/47/37) and reparations be further expanded to include
the other pillars of transitional justice, namely, the right to truth, the right to justice
and guarantees of non-recurrence.
17. The implementation of protection activities at the national level, in particular
by the international community, hand in hand with host Governments, remains a
major challenge in many countries. With the structural reform of the ne twork of
resident coordinators and humanitarian coordinators, however, international
leadership on human rights and on issues relating to internal displacement is now
much clearer. The Special Rapporteur hopes that the Internally Displaced Persons
Protection Expert Group, which she has established in collaboration with UNHCR
and the Global Protection Cluster, will contribute to the enhancement of United
Nations work by supporting country-level political will, national ownership and
coordinated international support for comprehensive protection responses, including
the building of a protective environment conducive to prevention and solutions to
internal displacement.
18. Multi-stakeholder approaches and intersectionality of rights of internally
displaced persons. The launch of the GP20 plan of action 12 by the Special
__________________
11
Walter Kaelin and Hannah Entwisle Chapuisat, Breaking the Impasse: Reducing Protracted
Internal Displacement as a Collective Outcome (United Nations publication, 2017), available at
[Link]/fr/publication/policy-briefs-studies/breaking-impasse-reducing-protracted-
internal-displacement.
12
Available at [Link]/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IDPersons/
[Link].

8/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

Rapporteur, UNHCR and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,
with the endorsement of Austria, Honduras and Uganda, ushered in a systematic,
multi-stakeholder approach to current issues of internal displacement. Focusing on
engaging national implementation of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement
and taking up four work streams – namely, the participation of internally displaced
persons, law and policy, data and analysis, and solutions to protracted displacement –
the GP20 plan of action saw concerted action by stakeholders from the United Nations
and civil society. The activities engaged in by the GP20 members, mainly with States
Members of the United Nations, enabled the Human Rights Council to debate on
substantive issues and current trends concerning the human rights issues affecting
internally displaced persons, and they triggered policy consideration in the
organizational cultures and policies of many stakeholders. 13 Although the GP20 plan
of action successfully concluded at the end of 2020, the group of organizations that
were the driving force behind the GP20 Steering Group continues to collaborate under
a new network known as GP2.0. Building on the lessons learned through the GP20
plan of action, this community of experts continues as an informal platform for joint
initiatives and events, as well as for the sharing of information and good practices on
internal displacement, focusing on State engagement. The Special Rapporteur is
pleased to have contributed to and instigated these endeavours and affirms the
importance of approaches to internal displacement that involve society as a whole.
19. Moreover, a multi-stakeholder approach to internal displacement facilitates
differentiated responses to the intersectionality of the human rights of internally
displaced persons, knowing that there are groups in the broad population of displaced
persons who may be more vulnerable and marginalized than others. The Special
Rapporteur therefore devoted one of her thematic reports to the rights of internally
displaced children (A/74/261), in which she applied the Convention on the Rights of
the Child to internal displacement, and another of her thematic reports to the rights
of internally displaced persons with disabilities (A/HRC/44/41), in which she
examined the specific experiences of persons with disabilities in the context of
displacement and analysed the obstacles to the equal enjoyment of their rights. The
Special Rapporteur encourages enhancement of disaggregated data in assessing
displaced populations and customized responses to the rights and needs of the
different groups.
20. An important group of stakeholders in the human rights of internally displaced
persons that requires the utmost recognition is the national frontliners in the countries
themselves. National human rights institutions are crucial actors in the protection and
promotion of the human rights of internally displaced persons. In her report to the
Human Rights Council (A/HRC/41/40), the Special Rapporteur examines their role
in different contexts of internal displacement and considers obstacles to their
engagement and their activities and positive practices at all phases of displacement,
from prevention of the conditions leading to internal displacement to their roles in
responses when displacement occurs and in processes to achieve durable solutions.
Consequently, the Special Rapporteur highlights the critical role of national human
rights institutions to ensure protection of human rights alongside and in collaboration
with other national and international partners. With the increase in the number of
internal displacement situations around the world, the Special Rapporteur is heartened
by the increased activities of these institutions responding to the rights of internally
displaced persons, encourages regional groups to en hance their sharing of practices

__________________
13
For a summary of the outcomes of the GP20 plan of action, see [Link]/en/special-
procedures/sr-internally-displaced-persons/multi-stakeholder-plan-action-advancing-prevention-
protection-and-solutions-internally-displaced.

22-11231 9/24
A/77/182

and expertise, and requests more support for their independence as effective
institutional human rights monitors in internal displacement situations.
21. Last but not least, the Special Rapporteur highlights the importance of academic
institutions and research and of capacity-building on internal displacement. The
closure of the Brookings Institution project on internal displacement, through which
the Institution had provided much research support to the mandate holder and
produced valuable publications on internal displacement, was a major setback to the
work of the Special Rapporteur. However, in recent years, academic institutions have
rebounded with the establishment of some courses on internal displacement and
others related to internal displacement issues. 14 Academic and practitioner research
and publications on various internal displacement issues are also on the rise, 15 as is
the integration of internal displacement issues into mainstream research, such as
through the Health and Internal Displacement Network. The Special Rapporteur is
likewise pleased with her continued collaboration with the International Institute of
Humanitarian Law based in San Remo, Italy – a collaboration that dates back to her
two predecessors and that has been strengthened with online courses. The internal
displacement law and policy courses now offered by the Institute in English, French
and Spanish have provided training to hundreds of government officials, United
Nations protection specialists and civil society actors in over 50 countries. The
Special Rapporteur thanks the many international donors who make these capacity -
building and academic courses and publications possible, and she commends the
academics, researchers and trainers behind these institutions for the creation of add ed
knowledge, analysis and capacity for internal displacement protection, and their
contribution to policy and programme implementation.
22. In the implementation of the tasks set out for her by the General Assembly and
the Human Rights Council in their respective resolutions, over the past six years the
Special Rapporteur has strived in her activities, country visits and dialogues to
address all relevant issues with a human rights-based approach using international
human rights law and, where relevant, international humanitarian law and disaster
law. The Special Rapporteur provides these reflections on the outcomes of her six -
year term with the awareness that such outcomes were the result of collaboration and
engagement by a wide range of interlocutors, who she sincerely acknowledges and
thanks. The Special Rapporteur wishes to reaffirm the importance of collaboration in
ensuring principled approaches to the broad challenge of promoting the human rights
of internally displaced persons.

III. Development-induced displacement and the human rights of

internally displaced persons
23. Development brings important benefits to society – reducing poverty, improving
living standards, enabling self-determination and expanding access to services.
Moreover, development is an inalienable human right, as established by the
Declaration on the Right to Development and the Vienna Declaration and Programme
of Action, and one that also enables the realization of other rights. Development
underpins durable solutions for internally displaced persons by providing the
livelihood opportunities necessary for sustainable integration or reintegration and by

__________________
14
See, for example, the University of London online course on internal displacement, conflict and
protection, available at [Link]/courses/internal -displacement-conflict-and-protection.
15
See, for example, the Researching Internal Displacement platform
([Link]

10/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

improving service delivery for displaced persons and host communities in areas of
settlement.16
24. However, development projects can also cause internal displacement, impeding
the realization of human rights. While internal displacement is often seen as an issue
linked to conflict, disasters and climate change, development projects regularly force
communities around the world to leave their homes. In its report, the High-level Panel
on Internal Displacement noted the importance of this challenge, citing the effects of
development megaprojects among the leading drivers of new displacement. 17 However,
development-induced displacement is something of an “orphaned issue” in terms of
global governance, as it is not perceived as a humanitarian issue and, as such, falls
outside the remit of agencies that traditionally address forced displacement. 18
25. The Declaration on the Right to Development emphasizes that individuals
should be empowered to be active participants in their development. In line with her
focus on strengthening the participation of internally displaced persons, in the present
report the Special Rapporteur will examine the situation of persons displaced by
development projects, highlighting the human rights challenges they face as a result
of such displacement, and make recommendations to relevant stakeholders to prevent,
mitigate and address the consequences of development-induced displacement.
26. The Special Rapporteur thanks all stakeholders who engaged in consultations
for the present report, including those in academia, civil society, development finance
institutions and the Office of the United Nations High Commissio ner for Human
Rights (OHCHR).

IV. Development-induced displacement: definition

and terminology
27. Defining development-induced displacement – also called development-based
displacement – can be controversial. Development finance institutions use the term
“involuntary resettlement”. However, this language optimistically emphasizes the
solution – resettlement – rather than the human rights challenges of displacement.
Displacement by development projects may occur without sustainable resettlement
materializing in practice or even in principle. Recognizing the particular challenges
faced by those displaced by development projects without human rights protection or
durable solutions, in the present report the Special Rapporteur will refer to
“development-induced displacement”.
28. Even this terminology is controversial, as some have argued that it does not
adequately capture the forced element of such displacement. 19 Such force may be
physical – through violence or threats against affected communities – or legal, if
States use expropriation through eminent domain, or the threat thereof, to compel
__________________
16
United Nations Development Programme, “Internal displacement: a development challenge with
a humanitarian face”, September 2021, available at [Link]/blog/internal-displacement-
development-challenge-humanitarian-face.
17
High-level Panel on Internal Displacement, “Shining a light on internal displacement”.
18
Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, “What does development -caused displacement look
like in Africa?”, December 2016, available at [Link]/expert-
opinion/what-does-development-caused-displacement-look-like-in-africa; and W. Courtland
Robinson, “Risks and rights: the causes, consequences, and challenges of development -induced
displacement”, paper prepared for the Brookings Institution and Johns Hopkins University
School of Advanced International Studies Project on Internal Dis placement, Washington, D.C.,
2003, p. 3.
19
Nadine Walicki, “Expert round table on displacement caused by development: event summary”,
paper prepared for the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, 2017, p. 7.

22-11231 11/24
A/77/182

populations to move or accept less than adequate compensation. People ma y be

displaced by development projects even without receiving eviction orders, owing to
the environmental footprint of certain projects having a negative impact on their
health, food security or livelihoods that eventually forces them to move. Such people
often face greater challenges in securing their rights, as they may not be officially
recognized as project-affected. States or development actors 20 may fail to respect or
enforce the rights of affected populations before, during and after displacement.
Affected populations may be unaware of their rights or unable to safely gain access
to effective remedy mechanisms. 21 Development-induced displacement under any of
these circumstances constitutes arbitrary displacement.
29. Certain development projects are especially likely to induce displacement. The
most well-known types are large-scale energy and transport infrastructure projects
(dams, roads, highways, canals, power plants, railways, airports and spaceports),
extractive projects (mines, oil and gas fields, and energy pipelines), and large-scale
agribusiness. These projects can displace people through their extensive requirements
for land and through their environmental impact on communities’ health, food
security and livelihoods.
30. Even development projects with ostensibly benign aims can provoke significant
displacement. Conservation projects have the important aim of safeguarding wildlife
and the environment yet often result in the displacement of indigenous peoples from
their lands, which they have managed sustainably for generations. Tourism projects,
such as the development of resort zones or the construction of stadiums for global
sporting events, may lead to the forced eviction and arbitrary displacement of local
communities. Urban renewal or “city beautification” projects can benefit local
communities, yet they often result in those communities being forcibly evicted or
displaced by economic pressures as renewed neighbourhoods become more desirable
to wealthier groups.

V. International legal standards

A. Human rights instruments

31. The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement establish that the prohibition
of arbitrary displacement includes cases of large-scale development projects unless
justified by compelling and overriding public interests (principle 6). Arbitrariness, as
clarified by the Human Rights Committee, should not be equated with illegality – as
displacement can be legal under national law yet arbitrary under international law –
but should be interpreted more broadly to include elements of appropriateness,
injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law, as well as elements of
reasonableness, necessity and proportionality. 22
32. Principle 7 obliges authorities to explore all possible alternati ves to
displacement. If no alternative emerges, authorities must base displacement on a legal
decision, provide full information on the reasons and procedure for displacement and
on compensation and relocation, seek affected communities’ free and informed
consent, and involve them in relocation planning. Displacement proceedings should
not violate the fundamental rights of the displaced (principle 8). Authorities should
prevent in particular the displacement of indigenous peoples and other groups with a
special dependency on and attachment to their lands (principle 9) and should comply

__________________
20
Public, private or multilateral development financiers or implementers and their intermediaries.
21
Remedy in Development Finance: Guidance and Practice (United Nations publication, 2022), p. 30.
22
Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 36 (2019), para. 12.

12/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

with the right to effective remedy for rights violations (principle 7 (f)). These
principles apply to development-induced displacement.
33. The basic principles and guidelines on development-based evictions and
displacement include and expand on the above points. They emphasize that forced
evictions23 are a gross violation of human rights (paras. 1–9). Duty bearers should ensure
that development-based evictions do not constitute forced evictions (para. 10) and
should adapt laws and policies to protect the right to adequate housing (paras. 21–30).
Human rights safeguards are necessary prior to, during and after evictions (paras. 37–68).
Evictions should only occur in exceptional circumstances, be authorized by law, be
carried out in accordance with international human rights standards, be undertaken
solely to promote the general welfare, and ensure compensation and rehabilitation
(para. 21). Effective project disclosure entails appropriate notice, a reasonable time
period for review, public hearings, and the provision of legal and technical advice to
affected populations (para. 37), including on planned resettlement (para. 56). The
basic principles also outline protection and assistance standards, including conditions
under which evictions should be carried out, the criteria for adequate housing
(paras. 43–51, 55–58), and measures to provide those displaced with appropriate
compensation and remedy, including the principle of like-for-like compensation for
lost land (paras. 59–63 and 72).
34. The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights apply to States and
private development actors. They oblige States to create a legal environment
conducive to the respect for human rights by businesses (principles 1–10). Businesses
should prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to
their operations by their business relationships, even when they have not directly
contributed (principle 13), and they should have policy commitments to meet their
human rights obligations (principle 15). Businesses should undertake impact
assessments and human rights risk analyses prior to commencing operations,
including meaningful consultations with affected persons (principle 18), and should
integrate the findings of these assessments into their operational processes (principle 19).
Businesses should proactively respect international human rights and treat the risk of
contributing to human rights abuses as a compliance issue (principle 23). Businesses
should facilitate remediation of adverse human rights impacts, including by
establishing their own grievance mechanisms, and States should provide access to a
range of judicial and non-judicial grievance mechanisms, in line with established
criteria for effectiveness (principles 22, 25–29 and 31).
35. The Kampala Convention obliges States parties to prevent arbitrary
displacement (art. IV), including development-induced displacement (art. X), and
calls on States parties to prevent such displacement, explore feasible alternatives,
provide affected persons with full information and consultation, and carry out
pre-implementation socioeconomic and environmental impact assessments of
proposed development projects.

B. Safeguard policies of the international financial institutions

36. The major international financial institutions have safeguard policies dealing
specifically with development-induced displacement, termed “involuntary
__________________
23
Defined in the basic principles as “acts and/or omissions involving the coerced or involuntary
displacement of individuals, groups and communities from homes and/or lands and common
property resources that were occupied or depended upon, thus eliminating or limiting the ability
of an individual, group or community to reside or work in a particular dwelling, residence or
location, without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection”
(para. 4).

22-11231 13/24
A/77/182

resettlement”. 24 Anticipated or actual violations of safeguard policies may be

addressed through institutional independent accountability mechanisms or through
project-level grievance redress mechanisms. While the primary purpose of these
policies is to guide the operations of the institution in question, the policies, in
particular those of the World Bank Group, have a “soft law” influence on the
normative environment, as they have been reflected in and incorporated into the
policies of other public and private financial institutions (A/HRC/22/46/Add.3,
para. 14).
37. The Group’s key safeguards on land acquisition and involuntary resettlement –
the World Bank environmental and social standard 5 and the International Finance
Corporation performance standard 5 – cover many of the above-mentioned
international human rights principles, including the avoidance of displacement in
cases where alternatives are possible, the prohibition of forced evictions, the informed
engagement of communities throughout all phases of resettlement planning, the
restoration of livelihoods and living standards, access to grievance mechanisms, and
transparent compensation for lost assets (in-kind for land where feasible). Affected
populations include communities with and without formal tenure, host communities,
and those with user rights to project-affected land and resources.
38. Special procedures mandate holders have previously highlighted how these
safeguards could be strengthened in policy and practice. The Special Rappor teur on
adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and
on the right to non-discrimination in this context recommended that the safeguards
limit development-induced displacement to exceptional circumstances on the basis of
a welfare assessment of those to be displaced, explicitly guarantee the right to
adequate housing in line with international human rights standards, and establish
procedural guidelines for evictions (A/HRC/22/46/Add.3, paras. 19–44). The Special
Rapporteur on the right to development recommended holding financial
intermediaries accountable for upholding safeguard policies, combating reprisals
against persons raising concerns about development projects, and strengthening
stakeholder engagement and project disclosure, observing that the technical nature of
consultations often precluded the substantive participation of civil society. He further
noted a lack of monitoring to ensure that engagement and disclosure safeguards were
implemented in practice and pointed out that the right to engagement was distinct
from the right to consent, and that, even if affected communities enjoyed the right to
engagement, their ability to resist or refuse projects might still be limited (A/75/167).
39. These critiques underscore the gaps in human rights protection in these
institutions’ safeguard policies, the limited implementation of these policies in
practice, and the ineffectiveness of institutional remedy mechanisms in providing
redress. Communities displaced by development projects thus face significant barriers
to the enjoyment of their human rights even when policies are in place to mitigate
these impacts. The human rights impacts on communities displaced by actors with
weak or absent safeguard policies – which may be the rule rather than the exception –
are likely to be even more severe.

__________________
24
For a comparative analysis of these institutions’ p olicies, see Miloon Kothari and Maria L.
Bertelli, “Multilateral institutions and development -based displacement: a comparative analysis
of involuntary resettlement policies”, in The Other Side of Development: Displacement,
Involuntary Settlement and Rehabilitation (Routledge, forthcoming 2022).

14/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

VI. Potential consequences of development-induced

displacement on the enjoyment of human rights
40. While some of the more frequent human rights implications of development -
induced displacement are detailed below, these are illustrative rather than exhaustive,
as this complex process can affect the enjoyment of the full spectrum of human
rights. 25
41. The right to adequate housing 26 encompasses the rights to freedom of movement
and choice of residence and the right to freedom from arbitrary interference with one’s
privacy, family or home, 27 as well as protection from forced evictions. 28
Development-induced displacement can challenge the realization of these rights.
Homelessness is a frequent consequence of development-induced displacement, in
particular in cases where resettlement and compensation programmes are absent or
insufficient. 29 Even in cases where those displaced are provided with alternative
housing, it may not conform with international human rights standards for adequate
housing (E/1992/23, annex III). The involuntary nature of many cases of
development-induced displacement violates the right to the choice of residence, as
well as to freedom from interference with one’s home.
42. In cases where evictions for development projects occur without appropriate
protection and assistance, they can amount to forced evictions, which are a gross
human rights violation. 30 Depending on the manner in which they are planned and
carried out, development-induced evictions may imperil the right to freedom from
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, the right to security of person, including
protection from arbitrary arrest and detention, and even the right to life, 31 in addition
to all of the other rights detailed in this section and the following sections. 32
43. The right to work and protection against unemployment 33 and the right to
property 34 are imperilled by development-induced displacement, which frequently
leads to landlessness, loss of access to common property and joblessness. 35
Landlessness leads to sharp declines in income for those affected, while loss of access
to common property may affect in particular those who use but do not own community
lands for livelihoods, including women, pastoralists, peasants and the poor. Taken
together, the loss of land and access to common property may not only infringe on
the right to own property but can also imperil the right to work, as displaced
communities may not be able to work in the absence of their traditional lands and
common property. Joblessness is another frequent consequence of displacement for
communities relocated to areas where they are unable to practise familiar livelihoods.

__________________
25
Lidewij van der Ploeg and Frank Vanclay, “A human rights based approach to project induced
displacement and resettlement”, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, vol. 35, No. 1 (2017),
p. 35.
26
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 11.1.
27
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, arts. 12 and 17.
28
OHCHR, “The human right to adequate housing”, available at [Link]/en/special-
procedures/sr-housing/human-right-adequate-housing.
29
Michael M. Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction: a model for population
displacement and resettlement”, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 35, No. 41 (2000), p. 3664.
30
Commission on Human Rights resolutions 1993/77 and 2004/28.
31
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, arts. 6 –7 and 9.
32
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN -Habitat) and OHCHR, “Forced evictions”,
fact sheet No. 25/Rev.1, 2014, pp. 5–6.
33
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 6.
34
OHCHR, “Land and human rights: standards and applications”, 2015, p. 54.
35
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, pp. 3663 –3664.

22-11231 15/24
A/77/182

44. Development-induced displacement threatens the right to an adequate standard

of living and the continuous improvement of living conditions. 36 It can lead to
marginalization or “downward mobility” as livelihoods are downgraded, if not lost,
and professional skills go unused or become obsolete. 37 Relocation areas may lack
access to basic services that communities previously enjoyed, or these services may
already be in use by host communities and become overburdened by new arrivals. It
may be difficult to gain access to services that require fluency in the local language.
Taken together, these phenomena amount to a continuous deterioration of living
standards, in contrast to the right to continuous improvement of living standards. The
quality of compensation and resettlement programmes also has an impact on the
enjoyment of this right. Compensation should be provided in a timely manner on the
basis of a comprehensive valuation methodology and should serve as bridging
assistance with respect to comprehensive livelihoods restoration programmes.
However, such programmes are the rare exception – the World Bank Inspection Panel
has found that the policy goal of conceiving and executing resettlements as
sustainable development programmes has not been achieved in many of the cases
investigated. 38 The right of host communities to an adequate living standard may also
be adversely affected, as the arrival of the displaced may increase competition for
local services, resources or jobs, and there may be no provision for host communities
to receive assistance or compensation to offset these impacts. 39 This points to the
necessity of area-based approaches in resettlement programmes, taking into account
the impacts on both the displaced and the host communities.
45. Other rights that may be affected by development-induced displacement include
the right to food, 40 the right to health41 and the right to education. 42 Food insecurity is
a frequent consequence of development-induced displacement, owing to the loss of
productive land and livelihoods. Increased morbidity and mortality may result from
stress, trauma and higher rates of communicable disease. Education for children is
disrupted by relocation, and some children may never return to school. 43
46. Development-induced displacement may have a particular impact on the rights
of women, in violation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (notably art. 14 (g), which mandates equal treatment
for women in land resettlement schemes). Governments may not recognize women as
heads of households, thereby denying them compensation for land or assets lost. 44
Tenure systems often discriminate against women, which is a pattern that may be
transposed or exacerbated during relocation (A/HRC/22/46/Add.3, para. 46).
Development actors may establish discriminatory relocation and compensation
policies, such as by imposing a higher age limit for unmarried women to claim
compensation than for unmarried men. 45 Women may depend more on communal
resources – having user but not ownership rights over productive land, for example –

__________________
36
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 11.
37
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, pp. 3663 –3664.
38
World Bank Inspection Panel, “Involuntary resettlement”, Emerging Lessons Series No. 1
(Washington, D.C., International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank,
2016), p. 19.
39
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, pp. 3666 –3667.
40
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 11; for more details on
development-induced displacement and the right to food, see A/HRC/13/33/Add.2.
41
International Covenant on Economic, Social an d Cultural Rights, art. 12.
42
Ibid., art. 13 and Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 28.
43
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, pp. 3665 –3666.
44
Robinson, “Risks and rights”.
45
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, p. 3666.

16/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

but may neither be compensated for this loss nor have access to comparable
community resources in relocation areas.46
47. The rights of indigenous peoples to self-determination, livelihoods,
development, control over their lands and resources, and protection from
displacement are detailed in articles 3, 4, 8, 10, 18, 20, 23 and 26–28 of the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Nonetheless, they continue
to be disproportionately affected by development-induced displacement. The
relatively unexploited nature of their lands makes them a prime target for the
extractive, hydropower, agribusiness and conservation sectors, and a significant gap
remains between the recognition and the implementation of indigenous rights. 47

VII. Challenges in addressing development-induced

displacement and the human rights of those displaced
A. Inadequate disclosure, consultation and consent

48. Disclosure and consultation are well-established safeguards; however, the

manner in which they are carried out can be more of a “tick-the-box” exercise than a
genuine effort to engage affected communities. 48 Information provided may be
incomplete, inaccessible or provided too late for effective action. Development actors
may not be open to changing their plans on the basis of feedback from the
communities, rendering consultation “meaningless” as it amounts to little more than
a listening exercise. Free participation may be curtailed by the use of public health
restrictions as a pretext for limiting attendance or by the presence of security forces
or armed groups, who may use intimidation or violence to discourage opposing views.
49. In evaluating the consent provided by affected populations to the acquisition of
their lands, States and development actors may only deem non-consensual those land
transactions that involve expropriation through force or eminent domain, while
regarding all other scenarios as “willing buyer willing seller” situations. However,
there are many ways in which “voluntary” transactions may have elements of
coercion. Project developers may withhold information or provide inaccurate
information on the project’s impacts, on the affected community’s rights to contest
the project or on relocation assistance, which encourages affected populations to
provide consent either on the basis of false pretences or because they feel th e only
alternative would be expropriation, to which even minimal compensation would be
preferable. Power disparities between affected communities and those aiming to
acquire their land may problematize the former’s ability to give free consent.
50. Land tenure patterns may also influence the quality of consent. Formal tenure
for communal lands may be held by elites, or elites may position themselves as the
rightful owners of that land, leading project developers to seek and obtain only their
consent, even though other members of the community who may also be affected by
the loss have not consented to the transaction. Project developers may also apply
“divide and conquer” approaches, fomenting or exploiting divisions within
communities to obtain the consent of some members and represent it as that of the
whole community. They may also use supportive factions to pressure resistant
members of the community (see A/HRC/32/35/Add.3). Those with use rights but not

__________________
46
Robinson, “Risks and rights”.
47
For a detailed analysis, see State of the World’s Indigenous Peoples: Rights to Lands, Territories,
and Resources, vol. V (United Nations publication, 2021).
48
Remedy in Development Finance, p. 38.

22-11231 17/24
A/77/182

ownership rights, such as pastoralists, tenant farmers or renters, may not have their
consent sought at all.
51. The lack of adequate disclosure and consultation can lead to the human rights
violations described previously but is also in itself a violation of affected
communities’ right to participation, which, as derived from the International Bill of
Human Rights, implies that all citizens have an equal right to participate in decisions
that affect them, including those concerning development, displacement and
relocation. 49 The Special Rapporteur has consistently affirmed the right of
participation of internally displaced persons when confronted by internal
displacement, regardless of the cause (see A/72/202). When compounded by a lack of
consent, inadequate disclosure and consultation may also infringe on the right to self -
determination, 50 which includes the right of all peoples to dispose of their natural
wealth and resources, and which States have a positive obligation to safeguard.

B. Insufficient global and longitudinal data

52. There is no agreed global figure or estimate for the overall number of people
living in forced displacement owing to development projects, in sharp contrast with
the situation for those displaced by conflict or disasters. 51 In the absence of such data,
it is difficult to raise awareness regarding development-induced displacement, as
opponents may easily argue that the phenomenon does not exist or is so limited as to
not warrant the international community’s attention. Another significant drawback is
the lack of an agreed methodology, unlike in conflict or disaster scenarios, to track
development-induced displacement.
53. A further lacuna is the absence of longitudinal data on outcomes for persons
displaced by development projects. Properly evaluating the long-term human rights
impacts of displacement, the efficacy of resettlement programmes and the “winners
and losers” of development-induced displacement requires thorough and
disaggregated longitudinal monitoring and evaluation. Such assessments may
evaluate whether the project, relocation and compensation provided have a positive,
negative or mixed impact on affected populations’ living standards and the enjoyment
of their human rights and, crucially, how different segments of the population have
been affected, including those who may face additional barriers or discrimination
owing to characteristics such as age, gender, disability or minority status. 52 Such
assessments should be repeated over time, as post-project outcomes may vary
dramatically depending on the period at which the population is surveyed. 53 However,
such longitudinal analysis is not a regular feature of development projects, especially
after project completion. 54

__________________
49
Robinson, “Risks and rights”.
50
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, art. 1.
51
Walicki, “Expert round table on displacement caused by development”, p. 9.
52
World Bank Inspection Panel, “Involuntary resettlement”, p. 7.
53
Brooke Wilmsen and Andrew van Hulten, “Following resettled people over time: the value of
longitudinal data collection for understanding the livelihood impacts of the Three Gorges Dam,
China”, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, vol. 35, No. 1 (2017).
54
World Bank, “World Bank acknowledges shortcomings in resettlement projects, announces
action plan to fix problems”, 4 March 2015, available at [Link]/en/news/press-
release/2015/03/04/world-bank-shortcomings-resettlement-projects-plan-fix-problems.

18/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

C. Limited scope of due diligence

54. Due diligence should be comprehensive in geographical scope and in

consideration of human rights risks. Development actors may underestimate the
geographical area or population that will be affected by a project by focusing only on
its physical footprint rather than its secondary impacts, such as restrictions on access
to routes, land or resources. 55 States and development actors may not see human rights
due diligence as a routine obligation, or they may carry out such analysis only in
circumstances that are judged to be particularly high risk 56 or when there is
opposition. Those developers that do carry out such due diligence may see it as a one-
time exercise rather than an ongoing process to assess emerging risks at different
phases of implementation. Multilateral and international development actors may fail
to adequately evaluate the local legal framework and institutional capacity before
delegating sensitive tasks to local authorities.
55. Due diligence should also inform project closure or the decision for a
development actor to exit. The term “responsible exit” covers planned and unplanned
exits by development financiers and refers to the obligation of these actors to ensure
that project-affected people are not left worse off after their involvement. 57 In the
context of development-induced displacement, this means ensuring that those
displaced and resettled have livelihoods and living standards that are at least
equivalent to pre-displacement levels. This requires ongoing monitoring and
evaluation of the socioeconomic status of project-affected populations over an
appropriate period of time, which, as detailed previously, is largely absent.
56. Development actors with strict safeguards may be tempted to “cut and run”
when rights violations are brought to their attention. However, this is unlikely to leave
those displaced better off, as the project may be taken over by an actor with fewer
safeguards. Development actors may seek to exit a project upon its completion;
however, the consequences of displacement on project -affected communities may
endure far longer. Responsible exit entails working with States and others who will
take over management of the project to ensure that assistance to project -affected
communities continues until their human rights and living standards have been
restored. In practice, however, responsible exit is an emerging concept even for
development institutions with some rights standards in place, and these considerations
are not systematically applied. 58

D. Constrained access to effective remedy

57. Remedy mechanisms may fail to conform with the standards outlined in
principle 31 of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. 59 There may
be no remedy mechanism in place at all, or remedy may be provided only through
national judicial systems, thereby limiting its effectiveness when the State is the
defendant if the separation of powers is not well established. Remedy mechanisms
frequently lack the power to enforce their decisions. Complainants report
unawareness of remedy mechanisms, inability to meet stringent eligibility criteria for
complaints, long delays in the adjudication process, a lack of clear communication, a
lack of access to the relevant expertise and information necessary to meaningfully
__________________
55
World Bank Inspection Panel, “Involuntary resettlement”, p. 5.
56
Remedy in Development Finance, p. 18.
57
Ibid., p. 92.
58
Ibid., p. 9.
59
For a full analysis, see Caitlin Daniel and others (eds.), Glass Half-Full? The State of
Accountability in Development Finance (SOMO, 2016), pp. 46–59, and Remedy in Development
Finance, annex II.

22-11231 19/24
A/77/182

engage in grievance processes, and the limited integration of human rights issues
within the scope of such mechanisms. 60
58. There are also significant levels of attrition as cases proceed through the review
process; not all cases are found eligible, and even fewer cases lead to results. 61
Communities and individuals may face challenges in lodging cases without support
from civil society organizations. 62 There may also be an accountability gap if the
primary development institution works through financial or operational
intermediaries, as the primary funder’s safeguards and remedy mechanisms may not
be effectively applicable to these parties (A/HRC/45/28, paras. 24 and 34).
59. Special Procedures mandate holders have raised the issue of protection for those
seeking remedy related to development projects on multiple occasions (see, for
example, A/HRC/45/28, paras. 31–36, and A/HRC/36/40, paras. 44–49). Human
rights defenders and environmental defenders who have raised concerns regarding
development projects have been the target of reprisal attacks, both through violence
and through criminalization of dissent (for further details, see A/HRC/47/39/Add.2).
Development institutions may lack the ability to extend to complainants security
measures other than anonymity and may not see protection as being within their
remit.63 States may even be seen to be complicit in the commission of, or tolerance
of, such reprisal attacks.
60. The lack of access to effective remedy not only prevents affected communities
from being able to advocate effectively for their human rights but is also in itself a
rights violation. 64 Attacks against and criminalization of those seeking remedy, as
well as the absence of effective measures to ensure their protection, also violate the
rights to life and to freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention.

E. Defining rights-based development

61. Development is often interpreted as macroeconomic growth, expanded trade and

increased consumption (A/HRC/36/40, para. 19). States that promote large
development projects despite the costs of displacement often argue that the benefits
to the overall population outweigh the costs borne by the few who are displaced – the
notion that one “can’t make an omelette without breaking some eggs”. Cost -benefit
analyses carried out by development actors may favour moving ahead with projects
if, as is often the case, costs and benefits are considered in the aggregate rather than
with reference to which segments in society will benefit and which will bear the
costs. 65 Social, environmental and human rights safeguards may be seen as additional
cost factors, despite evidence to the contrary (see A/70/274). Some development
agencies may have internal incentives for staff to prioritize moving ahead with
projects rather than focusing on negative externalities, such as displacement, in
particular for politically important projects or if success is measured in terms of
project volume. 66
62. By contrast, a rights-based approach to development analyses the inequalities
that underpin development challenges and aims to redress discriminatory practices

__________________
60
Daniel and others (eds.), Glass Half-Full?, pp. 46–59.
61
Ibid., pp. 10–16.
62
Ibid.
63
Daniel and others (eds.), Glass Half-Full?, p. 55.
64
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 2.
65
Cernea, “Impoverishment risks and reconstruction”, pp. 3671–3672.
66
Remedy in Development Finance, pp. 25–26.

20/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

and unjust distributions of power that impede development progress. 67 The

Declaration on the Right to Development calls on States to ensure that national
development policies improve the well-being of all individuals in society, on the basis
of their active, free and meaningful participation and the fair distribution of
development benefits. Moreover, the Declaration holds that every human person and
all peoples are entitled to participate in development, have the right to self-
determination, and hold sovereignty over their natural resources. The Sustainable
Development Goals emphasize that no one will be left behind and the importance of
reaching the furthest behind first. 68 The full realization of the right to development
thus means that every individual should benefit equally from development. This
requires a dedicated and proactive approach to the eradication of inequality.

VIII. Conclusions and recommendations

63. Unlike displacement caused by conflict or disasters, development -induced

displacement can be prevented through appropriate policy choices and by States
fully implementing their existing human rights commitments. This requires a
change in mindset, one that is centred on individuals and communities and
empowers them to realize their right to development rather than
paternalistically treating them as passive subjects whose agency is subordinate
to State interests. The recommendations below are provided in that spirit.

A. Ensure meaningful disclosure, participation and consent

64. States should:

(a) Evaluate the consensual nature of land transactions with more nuance
by considering power and information disparities that could influence the
quality of consent; undertake detailed and context-specific assessments of tenure
systems; and oversee negotiations to reduce coercive practices;
(b) Ensure that public health restrictions do not pose undue limitations
on the ability of affected communities to participate in disclosure and
consultation processes;
(c) Prohibit the presence of armed groups and security forces during
disclosure and consultation processes so as to ensure that discussions are free
from intimidation or violence.
65. States and development actors should:
(a) Ensure that information provided to affected populations is timely, is
provided in a space and format that is physically, culturally and linguistically
appropriate and accessible for all literacy levels, and is updated in ad vance of
each phase of project planning and implementation;
(b) Improve the quality of disclosure and consultation processes by
providing disclosure and consultation venues that are accessible to all groups,
including women, persons with disabilities, older persons, indigenous peoples

__________________
67
United Nations Sustainable Development Group, “Universal values principle one: human rights -
based approach”, available at [Link]
based-approach.
68
OHCHR, “Development agenda at risk unless States honour political and financial commitments,
UN experts warn”, 2 December 2016, available at [Link]/en/press-releases/2016/12/
development-agenda-risk-unless-states-honour-political-and-financial.

22-11231 21/24
A/77/182

and minorities, and by ensuring meaningful participation and continuous and

good-faith consultation throughout all phases of the project cycle;
(c) Seek the informed consent of, rather than merely engaging, affected
populations by providing them with the opportunity to shape development and
resettlement plans, propose alternatives or refuse projects entirely, in line with
the right to development;
(d) Facilitate access to legal and technical assistance to enable affected
communities’ informed participation.
66. The international community, national human rights institutions and civil
society should:
(a) Monitor and report on the quality of disclosure, participation and
consent in relation to development projects with displacement impacts and
advocate for improved practices;
(b) Provide legal and technical assistance to affected communities to
improve the quality of their engagement.

B. Create an enabling environment for the realization of human

rights in the context of development projects

67. States should:

(a) Incorporate relevant human rights standards into national law,
including the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the basic principles
and guidelines on development-based evictions and displacement, and the
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and establish or mandate a
body to oversee implementation in practice;
(b) Ensure prompt and impartial investigation and prosecution of
incidents of reprisals against those raising concerns regar ding development
projects.
68. States and development actors should:
(a) Make human rights due diligence a systematic part of the project
cycle, and operationalize the results thereof, by:
(i) Undertaking risk assessment related to displacement and assessment
of the local legal framework and institutional capacity prior to any project;
(ii) Ensuring that all human rights risk assessments accurately assess the
totality of the affected population, the catchment area, and the primary a nd
secondary risks related to development-induced displacement;
(iii) Providing performance incentives for not proceeding with
development projects assessed as having undue human rights impacts;
(iv) Evaluating the human rights impacts of disengaging from a project
prior to the decision to disengage;
(b) Improve the effectiveness of remedy mechanisms by:
(i) Facilitating access to free legal and technical assistance for
communities to gain access to remedy mechanisms; and ensuring that
remedy mechanisms are accessible and reliable, that they operate
transparently, and that they provide enforceable judgments within a
predictable time frame;

22/24 22-11231
 A/77/182

(ii) Holding intermediaries and third parties responsible for respecting

the State or actor’s established environme ntal, social and human rights
standards and adopting zero-tolerance policies towards reprisal incidents.
69. National human rights institutions and civil society should:
(a) Support and report on the quality of human rights due diligence and
risk analyses and provide capacity-building to strengthen human rights
awareness and enforcement;
(b) Provide free legal and technical assistance to affected communities to
help them gain access to remedies and proactively bring eligible issues before
relevant remedy mechanisms;
(c) Advocate for the incorporation into national law of international
human rights standards and principles related to development -induced
displacement.
70. The international community should:
(a) Provide States with technical assistance and capacity-building to
strengthen human rights legal frameworks and institutional capacity in the
context of development, and develop national laws and policies related to
development-induced displacement that align with international human ri ghts
standards;
(b) Advocate for policies related to development-induced displacement
that align with international human rights standards within multilateral
development actors and provide oversight of implementation;
(c) Create or mandate a multilateral body to address development-
induced displacement globally.

C. Adopt a rights-based approach to development

71. States should adopt and promote national development plans that promote
the realization of the right to development.
72. States and development actors should:
(a) Support affected communities in their efforts to realize the rights to
work, property and an adequate standard of living, including by:
(i) Providing fair, adequate and timely compensation for all assets lost,
including communal property, using transparent and proper valuation
methods, while moving beyond compensation-only approaches to include
the livelihood support that is necessary for displaced communities to regain
their pre-displacement standards of living;
(ii) Ensuring that resettlement arrangements in compliance with
international standards for adequate housing are agreed on with affected
communities and are fully in place prior to any evictions or demolitions;
(b) Promote the realization of the right to development by:
(i) Avoiding displacement for development projects whenever possible,
limiting it to exceptional circumstances;
(ii) Enabling those displaced to benefit from development gains generated
by the project and utilizing disaggregated cost-benefit analyses as the basis
for development decision-making.

22-11231 23/24
A/77/182

73. The international community, national human rights institutions and civil
society should advocate for development models that align with international
human rights commitments, including the Declaration on the Right to
Development and the imperatives of the Sustainable Development Goals.

D. Close the data gap

74. States and development actors should:

(a) Collect, publicize and regularly update disaggregated statistics on the
number of people displaced by development projects they lead or finance and
detail the methodology used;
(b) Collect baseline data on the human rights situation and living
conditions of project-affected populations, disaggregated by group; conduct
regular follow-up evaluations, including post-project, to assess how the
enjoyment of human rights and the living standards of project -affected
populations change over time; and publish these data and make them available;
(c) Use the above-mentioned data to inform policy decisions related to
development projects, relocation and compensation.
75. National human rights institutions and civil society should:
(a) Ensure that persons internally displaced by development projects are
included in human rights monitoring and assessments and in advocacy work,
and that they benefit from humanitarian assistance extended by humanitarian
organizations;
(b) Monitor State and third-party compliance with international human
rights standards related to development and displacement and repor t the results
thereof to the international human rights system.
76. The international community should create or mandate a multilateral body
to serve as a repository of global data concerning development -induced
displacement and agree on common statistical methods for data collection and
estimation.
77. The Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational
corporations and other business enterprises and the Special Rapporteur on
adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living,
and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, have endorsed the
recommendations above.

24/24 22-11231