2

# **1. Introduction**

The preferred “solution” to their displacement for many refugees worldwide is to return home (UNHCR 2019). For some this return will occur eventually, even if years or sometimes decades have passed since they left their home communities. However, there is little understanding of the impact of repatriation on social cohesion in communities of return. This is a major gap in the evidence as social cohesion is crucial to maintain peace and stability in communities that are recovering from conflict (Langer et al., 2017). In this paper, we explore the impact of repatriation on social cohesion in communities of return.

While there is limited evidence on the impacts of refugee return on social cohesion, there is substantial evidence on the impact of exposure to conflict on social cohesion (Bauer et al. 2016). This evidence, which comes from a range of academic disciplines, provides insights on the possible positive and negative impacts of repatriation on social cohesion in communities of return. On the positive side, those more exposed to conflict tend to behave more cooperatively after the end of conflict. They are more likely to join social and civic groups and get involved in activities that are intended to benefit others (Bellows and Miguel 2009; Gilligan, Pasquale, and Samii 2014; Voors et al. 2012). These effects tend to be long-lasting. On the negative side, studies suggest that the increase in cooperative behaviour is limited to in-group members and that there is a tendency for those more exposed to conflict to cooperate less with out-group members (Bauer et al. 2014; Cecchi, Leuveld, and Voors 2016).

Therefore, an important aspect is whether stayees (i.e. those who did not leave the country during the conflict) and returnees (i.e. those who left and returned) perceive each other in a way that would lead to greater social cohesion after conflict. Divisions that contributed to conflict, such as clan, ethnic, regional or class lines, can still be present after conflict and can overlap with return patterns if returnees or stayees are concentrated in a particular group. In this case, out-migration of particular groups can reify and reinforce conflict-era cleavages, and then reintroduce those cleavages through the process of refugee return.

The process of large scale emigration during the conflict can also lead to the creation of new divisions in society (e.g. stayees versus returnees). These divisions can either replace or get mixed with more traditional identity categories. There is evidence of these types of divisions in many countries including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, El Salvador, and South Sudan (Schwartz 2019). In this case, out-migration and return can affect social cohesion by creating new divisions (i.e. stayees versus returnees) within previously coherent social groups.

The impact of repatriation is not confined to identity issues only, there could be broader economic concerns (Ruiz and Vargas-Silva 2021). This is particularly the case in communities that have limited natural resources. The influx of a large number of returnees can lead to more competition for those resources (e.g. land, water) and affect the level of social cohesion in the community.

To explore the impact of refugee return on social cohesion we use data collected in Burundi in 2015. This country experienced a major conflict during the 1993-2005 period, in which close to 5% of the population was killed and around 10% was displaced to other countries, mainly to neighbouring Tanzania (Ruiz and Vargas-Silva 2015; Ruiz and Vargas-Silva 2016). The