NGA-NBS-IDP
Internally Displaced Persons in Nigeria 2024
IDP
Name | Country code |
---|---|
Nigeria | NGA |
Socio-Economic/Monitoring Survey [hh/sems]
The internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Nigeria face precarious situations that demand sustained attention and intervention from both national and international humanitarian partners. Although, we have International Human Rights Law (IHRL) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL), which has been
domesticated to address the plight of IDPs. To address the plight of the IDPs, there should be a proper understanding of the root causes of the displacement,
ensure the safety of the returnees, and provide the necessary steps towards alleviating the predicament of the IDPs in Nigeria.
Also, there is need for a database to guide the steps towards achieving the humanitarian need of the IDPs. Although there is inadequate database on IDPs in
Nigeria compared to most countries, it is worth noting that undertaking a national survey of this magnitude requires huge financial funding and human
deployments.
This baseline survey was conducted in seven (7) states namely; Adamawa, Yobe, Borno, Sokoto, Katsina, Benue and Nasarawa. The survey ascertained the
challenges IDPs and their host communities face concerning security, social cohesion, means of livelihood, and basic services. Similarly, it provided
information on the sources of intervention in the camp/shelter, among other things. Therefore, I sincerely hope that organisations and individuals will
find the information very useful to stimulate a call to action and influence government policy, humanitarian organisations and the international community to
prioritise the welfare of these vulnerable populations.
sample survey data[ssd]
The instruments used for the IDPs survey 2023 were categorized into the camp listing form, the household questionnaire for the IDPs and the host community questionnaire. However, the IDP questionnaire is organized into the following sections: identification information, Socio Demographic Characteristics of IDPs, Challenges faced by IDPs, Sources of Intervention in the Camp, Pathways to Durable Solutions, and Evidence-Based Recommendations to End
Displacement. The host community questionnaire has the identification section, Stability of the assessed area, livelihood and basic services, security, social cohesion and Key Informant.
It is worth noting that the Demographic Section targeted all household members, while key respondents were the heads of households, or any knowledgeable adult member aged 18 years and above.
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
National Bureau of Statistics | FGN |
Name | Role |
---|---|
International Organization for Migration | Technical Support |
The frame was obtained from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in September 2023. It comprises seven (7) states, with 340 camps, 251,082 households, and 1,134,828 individuals from fifty-two LGAs.
A multi-stage sampling technique was adopted to determine the sample of the study.
First stage
The first stage was the selection of LGAs in which 2 LGAs were selected from each state except in Katsina where 3 LGAs were studied which cut across both urban and rural, a total of fifteen (15) LGAs were covered.
Second stage
The second stage was the selection of the IDP camps. A sample of 40 camps was drawn from the fifteen (15) LGAs. The number of camps studied in each LGA was based on probability proportional to the size of the number of IDP camps in the LGA. A minimum of 5 and a maximum of 7 camps were studied within the selected LGAs. The selected IDP camps were verified through the Camps Register; a total of 11,392 households were verified and listed.
Third stage
Selection of households formed the third stage of selection where forty (40) households were selected per camp, making a total of 1600 households selected for the survey using a simple systematic random sampling technique.
The number of teams constituted in each state varied. A team comprised of three enumerators, (a team lead and 2 teammates). Each team covered 40 households per camp.
The focus group discussion for the Host Communities questionnaire was administered concurrently with household questionnaire. The host community questionnaire was community-based and the response from the informants is presumed to be a fair representation of community opinion. The number of discussants was between 5 and 12 persons which comprises both male and female. The composition of the discussion session includes Village
(Community) Heads, Women Leaders, Youth Leaders, Humanitarian organisations present in the community, Security Bodies, Local vigilantes, NGOs, and Religious Leaders.
A total of 120 field personnel were engaged in this survey. The fieldwork lasted for 12 days