Introduction
The previous blog discussed topics related to the design trajectory of refugee camps, but how about the institutional barriers? The United Nations is not, of course, immune to the disorder, created out of the intended bureaucratic order which often plagues large organisations.
Part of the due process in the times of an emergency will see a camp go through site selection, planning, design and construction. Finally, the management phase is carried out by the government authority in which the camp resides and the humanitarian partners from the Camp Coordination and Camp Management cluster (CCCM).
However, the pace at which a camp is built can vary from a few months to a year, bearing in mind, they often house many thousands of people, creating small cities over time. A population of a city in a year, in a new place, once never inhabited, can, in fact, be limited by the very institutional and bureaucratic arrangements it is born into. “Why”, you might ask? Well, simply put, the reason is in the embedded practices harboured in the sector and the humanitarian sector is not alone in this. History has shown itself to create, for one as a topic of conversation – drainage, a system by which water is conveyed as quickly as possible out of an urban space.
Historical roots of drainage practices
History offers a lens into one such challenge: drainage. The earliest systems for managing surface and wastewater date back to early Babylonian and Mesopotamian empires (4000–2500 BC). Today’s systems, including those in camps, still echo these early designs. As highlighted in a previous blog on UNHCR camp drainage, modern piped systems remain intangible and prone to failure, leading to flooding worldwide. These approaches, coupled with structural embeddedness and inter‑agency communication issues, create bureaucratic barriers in camp settings.
Ownership challenges in Camp WASH responsibilities
During an interview with Rafid Aziz, a UNICEF WASH Specialist, questions arose about who holds responsibility for WASH in a camp’s initial phases. During Syrian refugee movement into Kurdistan in 2012, a debate emerged between UNHCR and UNICEF over drainage responsibilities. This uncertainty meant drainage was not properly considered. For example, Domiz refugee camp in Dohuk was built on uneven terrain, with both blackwater and greywater conveyed through settling tanks that were undersized, not watertight and costly to maintain. Overflow during peak flows diluted wastewater but still caused contamination. This scenario reflects failures arising from unclear roles and lack of institutional ownership. Drainage improvements were later introduced by the French Red Cross, yet still focused on conveying water out of the camp as quickly as possible.
