About 15 million people every year are forced to live their homes to give way for huge development projects such as dams, highways, and mining. In most developing countries, such projects have been noted to increase ecological and social vulnerability, thus leaving the affected people displaced, disempowered and destitute. The literature review paper focused on the different risks communities are exposed to due to development induced displacement and resettlement. The data presented is review of online peer-reviewed and grey literature between the years 1980 through 2018. The risks analyzed through the Impoverishment, Risk and Reconstruction (IRR) model acts as a guide in selecting and understanding the risks of development induced displacement and Resettlement (DIDR) during social vulnerability assessment. Often the question of social vulnerability has been largely ignored due to the difficulty in quantification. Risk analysis also provides ground to further investigate reasons for the occurrence and persistency of the risks, in developing countries such as India, Sudan and Kenya. The findings of the review through the IRR model indicated that displacement and resettlement exposes project affected people to some opportunities, but largely associated with more risks. Some of the reasons for the persistency of the risks included; compensation for lost properties and lack of experience and capacity to handle resettlement processes. Identifying reasons for the persistency of the already known risks, especially in developing countries builds on the previous work on DIDR risks by Micheal Cernea and other researchers.

Millions of people are every year forcefully displaced from their places of residence and alienated from access to livelihood assets through large-scale development projects. This article examines different socio-economic consequences of displacement and resettlement caused by the planned oil-refinery site in Uganda. Household survey and interviews were employed to elicit the necessary data, analysed through descriptive statistics, logistic-regression and content analysis. Although the resettlement process exposed households to some benefits, most households were exposed to substantial risks. Over 81 per cent of households experiencing displacement lost their land and experienced reduced resource access. The results also showed significant relationships between consequences and socio-economic characteristics of respondents in that both male and female respondents had access to more and productive assets; and larger land sizes and incomes were reported to have been more affected. Also vulnerable groups including females and those with low or no education levels were more risk-prone than before the resettlement. In future development projects, the government should take into consideration the effect of the displacement and resettlement on asset access.

No abstract

No abstract