OIM - Migration Policy Practice (Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025)

Short articles to better connect migration research, policy and practice worldwide

MIGRATION

POLICY PRACTICE 2 Introduction: Navigating migration policy shifts in a time of profound uncertainty Marie McAuliffe, Richa Arora and Jenna Nassiri 4 Beyond the waters: The impact of the Kerala floods on migrant households and left behind families Himani Pasricha and Pooja Batra 13 Safeguarding statehood: A policy framework for addressing climate‑induced statelessness in Small Island Developing States Ankita Aggarwal and Jan Freihardt 23 Tapping into development finance to address displacement in the context of disasters and climate change: Are the policy foundations in place in Asia and the Pacific? Christelle Cazabat 29 Making migration work for climate adaptation: Classifying remittances as climate finance Sam Huckstep and Jonathan Beynon 38 Harnessing the momentum: Exploring the rising civic and political inclusion of migrants in a changing world Marie McAuliffe and Micaela Lincango 44 Responsible artificial intelligence in international migration management: Legal and practical considerations Ana Beduschi 52 Evaluating reintegration: The impact of IOM’s support for migrants returning to the Horn of Africa Chris Barnett, Katie Kuschminder, Andrew Pinney, Michael Loevinsohn and Leonora Evans‑Gutierrez ISSN 2223‑5248 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025

MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE

2

Introduction: Navigating migration policy shifts in a time of profound uncertainty

Marie McAuliffe, Richa Arora and Jenna Nassiri1 Global1 systems are undergoing rapid transformations, driven not only by environmental, geopolitical and technological change but also by sharp pivots in international policy and multilateralism. One such pivot continues to unfold, as the United States undertakes a comprehensive review of its

Global1 systems are undergoing rapid transformations, driven not only by environmental, geopolitical and technological change but also by sharp pivots in international policy and multilateralism. One such pivot continues to unfold, as the United States undertakes a comprehensive review of its foreign policy objectives and international aid delivery, which commenced in early 2025. 2 While the findings and implications of this review are still emerging, analysts agree that we are likely to witness a dramatic shift in international engagement and funding priorities with profound implications for populations in developing countries directly affected, including most especially the people and communities who receive life‑saving aid around the world. Among these beneficiaries are extremely vulnerable migrants, including those who have been displaced from their homes or have been victims of human trafficking networks. The contours of the post‑human rights landscape have already been well document by analysts and researchers for several years, 3 although the implications of a hollowed out multilateral system take this to another level entirely. 1 Marie McAuliffe, IOM; Richa Arora, GiZ; and Jenna Nassiri, IOM and York University. 2 The White House, Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid (20 January 2025). 3 Imogen Foulkes, “Are we heading towards a ‘post human rights world’?” BBC (30 December 2016); Marie McAuliffe, “ A ‘post‑human rights’ era is emerging. Here’s what it means for migrants – and how to stop it”, World Economic Forum (8 April 2024). Amid shifting policy directives and funding realignments, we are in the midst of shifting multilateral cooperation with major reverberations across the global humanitarian and migration landscape. These policy shifts have reoriented humanitarian aid, with the potential to further align it towards geo‑security and foreign policy objectives in many countries and regions. In response, actors across the multilateral system will have to explore new models of engagement,

reverberations across the global humanitarian and migration landscape. These policy shifts have reoriented humanitarian aid, with the potential to further align it towards geo‑security and foreign policy objectives in many countries and regions. In response, actors across the multilateral system will have to explore new models of engagement, partnership and sustainability in an evolving global landscape, including how to leverage frameworks like the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. This issue of Migration Policy Practice is released amid great uncertainty for international systems and norms, with major implications for how States respond to shocks across a wide range of economic, trade, political, security and development domains. Migration and mobility are deeply embedded within these domains, and the ramifications of upheaval will be felt first and foremost by local communities, including those who are at risk of (further) displacement due to a range of factors, such as conflict, insecurity, disaster and more. The articles in this issue cover a diverse range of topics, including on climate change and environmental shocks: the impact of the Kerala floods on migrant households (Pasricha and Batra), climate‑induced statelessness in Small Island Developing States (Aggarwal and Freihardt), the role of development finance in responding to disaster displacement in Asia and the Pacific (Cazabat) and the potential for classifying remittances as climate finance3 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025

MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE

(Huckstep and Beynon). Also included are articles on the evolution of civic and political inclusion of migrants (McAuliffe and Lincango), responsible artificial intelligence in migration governance (Beduschi) and the evaluation of reintegration support in the Horn of Africa (Barnett et al.). As the field of migration and the thousands of migration practitioners, policymakers and researchers seek to navigate a rapidly changing landscape, this research and analysis offers an opportunity to critically assess where we have

support in the Horn of Africa (Barnett et al.). As the field of migration and the thousands of migration practitioners, policymakers and researchers seek to navigate a rapidly changing landscape, this research and analysis offers an opportunity to critically assess where we have come from, what could be reimagined or set aside in shaping more responsive and resilient migration systems and policies moving forward. We hope you find this issue insightful. Marie, Richa and JennaVol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025

MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE

4

Beyond the waters: The impact of the Kerala floods on migrant households and left behind families

Himani Pasricha and Pooja Batra1 Introduction The1 escalating impact of climate change has led to increasingly frequent and severe disaster events, with South Asia being one of the most affected regions. In South‑East Asia, extreme weather events like cyclones, floods and typhoons caused the internal displacement of 9.6 million people in 2019, accounting for nearly 30 per cent of global displacements that year and 15 per cent of displacements due to disasters in 2022. 2 Kerala, home to numerous large river systems, relies heavily on monsoon rainfall for water availability. However, changing climatic patterns have intensified the frequency and magnitude of flooding, resulting in devastating consequences for communities. 3 These floods cause significant damage to lives, property and 1 Himani Pasricha is a PhD scholar at the University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland and Energy Policy Specialist at the ESB Networks, Ireland. Pooja Batra is Assistant Professor at the O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India. 2 M. Monirul Qader Mirza, “Climate change, flooding in South Asia and implications”, Regional Environmental Change, 11(Supplement 1), 95–107 (2011). Also, see Rajib Shaw, Yong Luo, Tae Sung Cheong, Sharina Abdul

Haryana, India. 2 M. Monirul Qader Mirza, “Climate change, flooding in South Asia and implications”, Regional Environmental Change, 11(Supplement 1), 95–107 (2011). Also, see Rajib Shaw, Yong Luo, Tae Sung Cheong, Sharina Abdul Halim, Sanjay Chaturvedi, Masahiro Hashizume, Gregory E. Insarov, Yoichi Ishikawa, Mostafa Jafari, Akio Kitoh, Juan Pulhin, Chandni Singh, Kripa Vasant and Zhibin Zhang, “Chapter 10: Asia”, in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Hans‑Otto Pörtner, Debra C. Roberts, Melinda M.B. Tignor, Elvira S. Poloczanska, Katja Mintenbeck, Andrés Alegría, Marlies Craig, Stefanie Langsdorf, Sina Löschke, Vincent Möller, Andrew Okem and Bardhyl Rama, eds.) (Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, Cambridge University Press, 2022) and Tushar Dakua, Manisha Kaushik and Vasim Ahamad, “ Natural disasters and internally displaced population in India: An analysis from IDMC data”, Man in India, 103(2–3):65–81 (2023). 3 Vimal Mishra, Saran Aaadhar, Harsh Shah, Rahul Kumar, Dushmanta Ranjan Pattanaik and Amar Deep Tiwari, “ The Kerala flood of 2018: Combined impact of extreme rainfall and reservoir storage ”, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 1–13 (2018) and BBC, “Kerala floods: Monsoon waters kill hundreds in Indian state”, BBC (18 August 2018). crops, disproportionately affecting vulnerable households and livelihoods. Kerala, located at the south‑western tip of India, experienced

System Sciences Discussions, 1–13 (2018) and BBC, “Kerala floods: Monsoon waters kill hundreds in Indian state”, BBC (18 August 2018). crops, disproportionately affecting vulnerable households and livelihoods. Kerala, located at the south‑western tip of India, experienced catastrophic floods in 2018 and 2019, with the August 2018 floods being among the most severe in the state’s history. Widely recognized for its high quality of life, social equity and exemplary governance, Kerala stands as one of India’s most developed states, often known for its advancements in human development. 4 However, the unprecedented rainfall during the 2018 and 2019 monsoon seasons – 42 per cent above average in 2018 and 123 per cent in 2019, according to the Central Water Commission – caused widespread landslides and devastating floods across the state. 5 Millions of households were affected, and rivers overflowed across various regions, necessitating the establishment of 12,253 relief camps to shelter 3,415,937 displaced people in 2018 and 1,326 relief camps, which gave shelter to 250,638 people in 2019.6 Floods are a powerful driver of migration, disrupting livelihoods, displacing communities and overwhelming essential services. While much of the existing research focuses on migration decisions during or after floods, less attention 4 National Institution for Transforming India (NITI Aayog), SDG India Index: Baseline Report 2018 (n.p., Government of India, 2018). 5 See India, Central Water Commission, Study Report: Kerala Floods of August 2018 (n.p., Central Water Commission, 2018). 6 See India, Government of Kerala, Disaster Management (Additional Chief Secretary), State Relief Commissioner, Kerala Floods – 2018: 1st August to 30th August 2018 (2018) and India, Government of Kerala, Department of

2018 (n.p., Central Water Commission, 2018). 6 See India, Government of Kerala, Disaster Management (Additional Chief Secretary), State Relief Commissioner, Kerala Floods – 2018: 1st August to 30th August 2018 (2018) and India, Government of Kerala, Department of Cooperation, Cooperative Alliance to Rebuild Kerala (CARe), A Sustainable Model for Social Housing.5 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE has been given to the socioeconomic impacts on migrant households and the families left behind in flood‑prone areas and how they recover and cope with the disaster.7 Understanding the vulnerabilities and coping strategies of these groups is essential for designing effective recovery and adaptation measures. This article utilizes data from the Kerala Migration Survey 2020 to explore how the 2018 and 2019 floods affected migrant households in Kerala. The study examines livelihood disruptions, financial strains and access to relief measures, focusing on the socioeconomic challenges faced by migrant families and those left behind. By analysing patterns of resilience and vulnerability, this article aims to provide actionable insights for inclusive disaster management and policy interventions tailored to the needs of migrant households in the context of climate‑induced disasters. Floods and migration Floods are one of the most disruptive natural disasters, often forcing individuals and communities to migrate, either temporarily or permanently. Acting as a driver of migration, floods destroy homes, disrupt livelihoods and overwhelm essential services. The extent to which individuals can cope with these impacts depends on their vulnerability – the degree of their exposure to risks – and their adaptive capacity, which reflects their ability to recover 7 See Tahmina Chumky, Mrittika Basu, Kenichiro Onitsuka, Md. Lamiur Raihan and Satoshi Hoshino, “ How do left‑behind families adapt to the salinity‑induced male out‑migration context? A case study of Shyamnagar

7 See Tahmina Chumky, Mrittika Basu, Kenichiro Onitsuka, Md. Lamiur Raihan and Satoshi Hoshino, “ How do left‑behind families adapt to the salinity‑induced male out‑migration context? A case study of Shyamnagar sub‑district in coastal Bangladesh”, Sustainability, 15(3):1–21 (2023). and mitigate future challenges.8 Flood‑induced migration takes various forms, with temporary migration being common during seasonal flooding, as people or households return home once conditions stabilize. However, in cases of extreme or recurrent flooding, permanent migration often becomes inevitable, especially when environments are rendered uninhabitable. Migration patterns are also shaped by geography, with internal migration – movement within the same country – being more prevalent because of its lower cost. In the case of natural disasters, moving internally is seen as one of the most prevalent options for the “trapped population”. 9 It is also common to see that only some individuals, especially youth, from the household migrate, leaving their families behind in catastrophe‑prone areas.10 Therefore, there is a gap in the literature that analyses the situations and conditions of left‑behind families and migrant households. The experiences of migrant families underscore the need for robust support systems. Integrating migration considerations into disaster management and climate adaptation policies can ensure displaced populations receive the resources and opportunities to rebuild their lives in safe and sustainable environments. 8 See the following papers for the discussion on flood and migration: Clark

L. Gray and Valerie Mueller, “ Natural disasters and population mobility in Bangladesh”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(16):6000– 6005 (2012); Olivia Dun, “ Migration and displacement triggered by floods in the Mekong Delta”, International Migration, 49(S1):e200–e223 (2011); Thomas K.J. McDermott, “Global exposure to flood risk and poverty ”,

6005 (2012); Olivia Dun, “ Migration and displacement triggered by floods in the Mekong Delta”, International Migration, 49(S1):e200–e223 (2011); Thomas K.J. McDermott, “Global exposure to flood risk and poverty ”, Nature Communications, 13(1):1–3 (2022); Tamara L. Sheldon and Cystal Zhan, “The impact of hurricanes and floods on domestic migration”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 115 (2022). 9 Richard Black, Stephen R.G. Bennett, Sandy M. Thomas and John R. Beddington, “Migration as adaptation”, Nature, 478(7370):447–449 (2011). 10 Himani Pasricha, “Climate‑induced migration and the opportunities for youth”, IOM Blog Series: Youth Voices on Migration, Environment and Climate Change (5 June 2024).6 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE This article utilizes data from the Kerala Migration Survey 2020 to analyse the impact of floods on households and examine the various adaptation strategies they employed in response. It explores how migrant households coped with the aftermath, focusing on livelihood disruptions, financial strains and access to relief measures. By identifying patterns of resilience and vulnerability, the article aims to provide insights for more inclusive disaster management and policy interventions.

Kerala floods: Factual insights The 2018 and 2019 Kerala floods were catastrophic events that highlighted the increasing frequency and severity of climate‑related disasters. In 2018, relentless rainfall from August 1 to 30 displaced over 3.4 million people and caused extensive property and infrastructure damage estimated at INR 47,963 crores (approximately USD 6.4 billion). The unprecedented rainfall, which exceeded forecasts by 96 per cent, triggered landslides and inundated 65,188 hectares of land, severely affecting homes, roads, agriculture and public

crores (approximately USD 6.4 billion). The unprecedented rainfall, which exceeded forecasts by 96 per cent, triggered landslides and inundated 65,188 hectares of land, severely affecting homes, roads, agriculture and public utilities. The following year, in August 2019, Kerala experienced another devastating monsoon, with rainfall 123 per cent above average. This event affected millions across the state and necessitated the establishment of 3,151 relief camps that sheltered over 612,000 displaced individuals.11 11 All data on damages are taken from the additional memorandum Kerala Floods – 2018: 1st August to 31st August 2018 and from India, Government of Kerala, Disaster Management (Additional Chief Secretary), State Relief Commissioner, Kerala Floods – 2019 (1st August to 31st August 2019) (2019). The 2018 floods claimed 339 lives, while the 2019 floods resulted in 125 fatalities, with districts like Malappuram recording the highest losses. Infrastructure damage was severe in both years. In 2018, 9,538 kilometres of roads and 510 bridges required repair, costing INR 10,048 crores (USD 1.3 billion), while 3,900 kilometres of roads and 95 bridges were damaged in 2019, with restoration costs reaching INR 164 crores. The power sector bore significant losses in 2018, amounting to INR 8,503 crores (USD 1.1 billion). Housing damages were equally devastating, with more than 800,000 homes impacted in 2018 and another 216,000 houses partially damaged in 2019, requiring extensive rehabilitation efforts. The agriculture and fisheries sectors were severely affected in both years. In 2018, 59,345 hectares of crops were destroyed, resulting in financial losses of INR 7,357 crores (USD 925 million). Meanwhile, in 2019, over 6,244 hectares of

The agriculture and fisheries sectors were severely affected in both years. In 2018, 59,345 hectares of crops were destroyed, resulting in financial losses of INR 7,357 crores (USD 925 million). Meanwhile, in 2019, over 6,244 hectares of agricultural land required desilting and debris removal, while crop and fish farm damages amounted to INR 5.8 crores. Livestock losses were also extensive, with over 750,000 animals perishing in 2018. Fishermen faced significant challenges across both years, losing boats, nets and livelihoods, with damages in 2018 alone costing INR 143 crores (USD 18 million). The Government mounted large‑scale rescue and relief efforts. In 2018, INR 27,100 crores (USD 3.4 billion) were spent on search, rescue and rehabilitation operations, complemented by the heroic efforts of local fishermen, who rescued over 65,000 people. In 2019, similar relief measures involved compensation for housing damages and support for affected families, amounting to INR 24,507 crores.7 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE While existing studies extensively explore the relationship between climate change, disasters and migration decisions, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding the experiences of families who remain in the affected areas. These families often face unique challenges, as they continue to live in the same disrupted environment. Understanding how they adapt, Table 1. Highlights of the 2018 and 2019 Kerala floods: Consequences and relief measures Rainfall Impact on people Property damage Relief measures 2018 96 per cent above forecasted rainfall from August 1 to August 30 3.4 million displacedINR 47,963 crores (~USD 6.4 billion) Extensive response to landslides, inundated 65,188

2018 96 per cent above forecasted rainfall from August 1 to August 30 3.4 million displacedINR 47,963 crores (~USD 6.4 billion) Extensive response to landslides, inundated 65,188 hectares of land; damage to homes, roads, agriculture and public utilities 2019 123 per cent above average during monsoon in August Over 612,000 displaced; 3,151 relief camps Not explicitly mentioned Relief camps for displaced individuals recover and manage their livelihoods in the absence of migrating family members is crucial for developing comprehensive post‑disaster policies. By shedding light on this often overlooked demographic, the research contributes to a broader understanding of disaster‑induced migration and its complex ripple effects within affected communities. Kerala Migration Survey 2020 This study analyses the Kerala Migration Survey conducted in 2018 and 2019, focusing on migrant households surveyed after the disaster. Respondents were asked about the floods’ effects on their households, their financial and physical capacities, and their strategies for rehabilitation. The survey included migrant households and the families left behind, offering insights into how these vulnerable groups navigated the aftermath of the disaster.12 The survey conducted with 1,785 households in 2018 and 2019 assessed the socioeconomic impacts of the floods. The findings reveal that 12 The data are from Centre for Development Studies (CDS) (Thiruvananthapuram), Kerala Migration Survey (Thiruvananthapuram, CDS, 2020). 11.76 per cent (210 households) were affected by floods in 2018, while 9 per cent (159 households) reported being affected in 2019. A significant proportion of these households experienced structural damages, with 41 per cent reporting such issues in 2018 and 30 per cent in 2019. These damages primarily involved disruptions

floods in 2018, while 9 per cent (159 households) reported being affected in 2019. A significant proportion of these households experienced structural damages, with 41 per cent reporting such issues in 2018 and 30 per cent in 2019. These damages primarily involved disruptions to water systems, electrical installations and sanitary facilities, underscoring the widespread infrastructural challenges caused by the floods. Among the surveyed households, 1,489 were non‑agricultural landowners and 498 were agricultural landowners. In 2018, 4.49 per cent of non‑agricultural landowners and 6.38 per cent of agricultural landowners reported damages. By 2019, these figures saw a slight decline, with8 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE 3.57 per cent of non‑agricultural landowners and 7.21 per cent of agricultural landowners reporting flood‑related damages. Agricultural landowner migrant households faced additional hardships due to crop damage. In 2018, 7.57 per cent of these households reported crop losses, while 13.8 per cent refrained from cultivating crops altogether that year. Similarly, in 2019, 7.57 per cent of agricultural landowner migrant households reported crop damages, while 11.21 per cent did not grow crops during the year. The survey also captured the experiences of 7,144 individuals aged 15 and above who had been either employed or actively seeking employment since June 2018. The results indicate that 28.18 per cent of respondents were affected by the floods in 2018, while 26.26 per cent faced similar disruptions in 2019. Among those impacted, 90 per cent reported a reduction in working days, with additional impacts including reduced working hours and, in some cases, the loss of employment entirely. The disruption to employment was substantial, with individuals losing an average of 21 working

faced similar disruptions in 2019. Among those impacted, 90 per cent reported a reduction in working days, with additional impacts including reduced working hours and, in some cases, the loss of employment entirely. The disruption to employment was substantial, with individuals losing an average of 21 working days due to the floods across 2018 and 2019. Additionally, affected individuals experienced an average of 40 days without work during this period. These findings highlight the profound impact of floods on livelihoods, especially for daily‑wage earners and those in precarious employment. The loss of income, coupled with extended periods of unemployment, exacerbates financial insecurity, disrupts access to essential resources and poses long‑term challenges to career stability for affected households. The survey asked households about the provision of relief and rehabilitation services, including who provided them and how they were accessed. These responses shed light on the Figure 1. Structural damages during 2018 and 2019 floods Water height 2018 Structural damage 2018 Structural damage 2019 Water height 2019 54.3634.36 9.23 2.05 65.33 30.67 4Outside house Inside the house up to knee level Yes No Yes No Outside house One storey Inside the house up to knee level 41 29.68 59 70.32 One storey Entire house was submerged in water9 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE coping mechanisms and strategies employed by migrant households during the floods. In 2018, almost 6 per cent of households reported having to relocate due to the floods, while in 2019, this figure decreased to 4 per cent. Displacement was predominantly temporary, with 98 per cent of households in 2018 and 95 per cent in 2019 reporting short‑term relocation. On average, households relocated for 14 days in 2018 and

figure decreased to 4 per cent. Displacement was predominantly temporary, with 98 per cent of households in 2018 and 95 per cent in 2019 reporting short‑term relocation. On average, households relocated for 14 days in 2018 and approximately 9 days in 2019. Table 2 presents data on the primary locations to which households relocated during these periods. The majority of households sought refuge either in government‑established relief camps or with relatives. In 2018, 31.31 per cent relocated to relief camps, while 62 per cent stayed with relatives. Similarly, in 2019, 27.87 per cent moved to relief camps and 67.21 per cent found shelter with relatives. These figures emphasize the critical role of government relief camps during disasters, as well as the importance of social networks, particularly relationships with relatives, in mitigating the impacts of displacement. The survey also examined the conditions of relief camps. The government of Kerala reported that thousands of such camps were established during the floods to provide shelter for displaced households. Over 70 per cent of respondent households described the conditions in relief camps as “good” or “satisfactory”, with camps being equipped with basic amenities. Additionally, more than 50 per cent of households reported receiving essential medical care in these camps, with consistent responses for both 2018 and

2019. These findings highlight the critical need for well‑equipped and efficiently managed rehabilitation strategies during disasters.

The impact of floods extends beyond physical damage and economic losses, profoundly affecting the mental well‑being of individuals and communities and often termed climate anxiety.13 The psychological distress caused by displacement, loss of livelihoods and uncertainty about the future often leaves lasting scars, particularly among the most vulnerable populations. The survey also reports the answers to questions about any psychological distress that migrant households might have to go through.

anxiety.13 The psychological distress caused by displacement, loss of livelihoods and uncertainty about the future often leaves lasting scars, particularly among the most vulnerable populations. The survey also reports the answers to questions about any psychological distress that migrant households might have to go through. Nine per cent of the households reported that they went through some kind of long‑term psychological distress in both 2018 and 2019. 13 Maha Akbar, “Over a year after Pakistan floods, survivors battle climate anxiety”, Stories, IOM (24 October 2023). Table 2. Where did the household relocate? 2018 (%) 2019 (%) Relief camps 31.31 27.87 Friends 1.00 0.00 Relatives 62.00 67.21 Neighbours 3.00 3.28 Others 2.00 1.6410 Vol. XIV, Number 2, June 2025 MIGRATION POLICY PRACTICE The data reveal distinct patterns in the psychological distress experienced by the elderly and children. Fear was the most prevalent response across both groups, reported by 58.82 per cent of the elderly in 2018 and 57.35 per cent in 2019, and by an even higher proportion of children – 69.07 per cent in 2018, rising to 72.92 per cent in 2019. Among children, sleeping disorders were also significant, reported by 8.25 per cent in 2018 and increasing to 9.38 per cent in 2019. Feelings of insecurity increased notably among the elderly, from 16.18 per cent in 2018 to 21.32 per cent in 2019, reflecting heightened vulnerability in the aftermath of recurrent floods. The 222  households reported that their children had missed school because of the floods in 2018 and 2019. These findings underline the diverse psychological impacts of floods on different demographic groups within households. They also emphasize

vulnerability in the aftermath of recurrent floods. The 222  households reported that their children had missed school because of the floods in 2018 and 2019. These findings underline the dive