Assessing the socioeconomic benefits of landscape restoration measures in refugee settlements: a case of Palabek Refugee Settlement in Northern Uganda

Abstract

The global growing refugee population is a threat to natural resource conservation in the host countries, mostly in developing countries (Maystadt et al., 2020). Uganda alone hosts over 1.5million refugees, making it one of the largest refugee hosting nations in Africa (UNHCR, 2022). While the country’s progressive open-door refugee policy provides land and socioeconomic opportunities (Betts et al., 2019), it has also intensified land degradation in and around refugee settlements (Bernard et al., 2022). Refugee households often depend on fuelwood, agriculture and construction materials derived from local ecosystems, resulting in deforestation, wetland reclamation, and soil exhaustion (Mohamed et al., 2020). These pressures create urgent demand for ecological restoration strategies that are both sustainable and socially inclusive. Landscape restoration is increasingly recognized as acritical approach to reserve degradation and restore ecosystem services in fragile environments. It encompasses both active interventions such as afforestation, reforestation and controlled fire management and passive strategies such as Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) which encourages natural regrowth of trees and shrubs (Weidlich et al., 2020). Restoration is widely debated for its dual role: on one hand, it is seen as essential for sustaining biodiversity, ecosystem functions and livelihood (Gann et al., 2019). On the other, it faces challenges linked to tenure insecurity, conflicting land uses, short donor cycles and limited community capacity (Gichuki et al., 2019). In refugee settlements, these debates are more pronounced because interventions must balance urgent humanitarian needs with long-term ecological stability. Studies highlight the variety of restoration practices like afforestation, agroforestry, FMNR, fire management and regenerative farming that have been applied in refugee and host community context (Hoque, 2022; Jalal et al., 2023). However, debates exist on whether these practices are truly integrated across humanitarian and environmental priorities and weather they are adaptive to local ecological and social realities. Critics note that projects often emphasize tree planting without ensuring long-term survival or integration into broader landscape functions.

Keyword: Landscape restoration, Refugee settlements