EU funded projects in BiH

Support to Return of Refugees and Displaced People

PROJECT DETAILS

Sectors Rule of Law and fundamental rights
EU Acquis chapters Other issues
Programme Funding Year 2007, 2010, 2012
Value €7,681,014
Periods of implementation 2010, 2012, 2014
Locations BANOVIĆI, GRAČANICA, GRADAČAC, KALESIJA, KLADANJ, LUKAVAC, SREBRENIK, TUZLA, ŽIVINICE, ČELIĆ, DOBOJ-ISTOK, SAPNA, TEOČAK, BANJA LUKA, BIJELJINA, BILEĆA, KOZARSKA DUBICA, GRADIŠKA, BROD, NOVI GRAD, ŠAMAC, BRATUNAC, ČAJNIČE, ČELINAC, DERVENTA, DOBOJ, GACKO, HAN PIJESAK, KALINOVIK, KOTOR VAROŠ, LAKTAŠI, LOPARE, LJUBINJE, MODRIČA, MRKONJIĆ GRAD, NEVESINJE, PRIJEDOR, PRNJAVOR, ROGATICA, RUDO, KNEŽEVO, SOKOLAC, SRBAC, SREBRENICA, ŠEKOVIĆI, ŠIPOVO, TESLIĆ, TREBINJE, UGLJEVIK, VIŠEGRAD, VLASENICA, ZVORNIK, SARAJEVO-CENTAR, HADŽIĆI, ILIDŽA, ILIJAŠ, SARAJEVO-NOVI GRAD, NOVO SARAJEVO, SARAJEVO-STARI GRAD, TRNOVO (FBiH), VOGOŠĆA, GRUDE, ŠIROKI BRIJEG, LJUBUŠKI, POSUŠJE, ČAPLJINA, ČITLUK, JABLANICA, KONJIC, NEUM, PROZOR, STOLAC, RAVNO, ODŽAK, ORAŠJE, DOMALJEVAC-ŠAMAC, BIHAĆ, BOSANSKA KRUPA, BOSANSKI PETROVAC, CAZIN, KLJUČ, SANSKI MOST, VELIKA KLADUŠA, BUŽIM, BOSANSKO GRAHOVO, TOMISLAVGRAD, GLAMOČ, KUPRES, LIVNO, DRVAR, BUGOJNO, BUSOVAČA, DONJI VAKUF, FOJNICA, GORNJI VAKUF - USKOPLJE, JAJCE, KISELJAK, KREŠEVO, NOVI TRAVNIK, TRAVNIK, VITEZ, DOBRETIĆI, FOČA - USTIKOLINA, GORAŽDE, PALE - PRAČA, FOČA, BREZA, KAKANJ, MAGLAJ, OLOVO, TEŠANJ, VAREŠ, VISOKO, ZAVIDOVIĆI, ZENICA, ŽEPČE, DOBOJ - JUG, USORA, PALE, BRČKO, BERKOVIĆI, NOVO GORAŽDE, DONJI ŽABAR, ISTOČNA ILIDŽA, ISTOČNI DRVAR, ISTOČNI MOSTAR, ISTOČNI STARI GRAD, ISTOČNO NOVO SARAJEVO, JEZERO, KOSTAJNICA, KRUPA NA UNI, KUPRES (RS), MILIĆI, MOSTAR, OSMACI, OŠTRA LUKA, PELAGIĆEVO, PETROVAC, PETROVO, RIBNIK, STANARI, TRNOVO (RS), VUKOSAVLJE

SUMMARY

During the period from 1992 to 1995, more than half of the pre-war population of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2.2 million people, fled from their homes. Among them over a million left the country while approximately 1 million persons were displaced within the country. Aside from the devastating human impact of the war nearly 500,000 homes, or almost half of all housing units in the country, were either partially or completely destroyed. Despite this significant and tangible progress, unmet needs still surpass available assistance, and more specifically the needs of the most vulnerable households that remain without a solution, who require tailor made approaches and additional social inclusion measures. The major current challenge is the wide discrepancy between financing capacities and the evident urgent needs of refugees, IDPs and returnees.

RESULTS

The action simultaneously contributes to the improvement of both living conditions and social inclusion through direct participation of local authorities and civil sector. The Action will from its onset ensure systematic and coordinated identification of prioritized vulnerable families in need of solutions, ensuring more proactive involvement in this process of the national actors that need to assume responsibility. It has to demonstrate a coordinated approach to more proactively include the identified vulnerable families in existing developmental and social welfare structures and plans. This will ensure that as an integral part of the impact of the project greater responsibility is assumed and more concerted action taken by national actors for Annex VII beneficiaries, so as to better equip the same national actors to identify and respond to the needs of this population in future.