South Sudan: climate change, mobility, and conflict dynamics
MECMEA Country Brief
This country brief examines the interconnections of environmental and climate change, conflict, and migration for internally displaced people (IDPs) in South Sudan. It investigates people’s humanitarian and protection needs, and their coping mechanisms.
The findings are based on 1,136 interviews with IDPs, who have been exposed to different impacts of climate change, most notably floods, carried out between May and July 2025 in Juba, Malakal, and Jonglei.
Flooding is the dominant climate hazard in places of origin. Among the surveyed IDPs who were primarily displaced due to disasters, 91% were affected by flooding or storms, often reoccurring in consecutive years, while drought affected just seven percent but had severe localised impacts.
Climate shocks are persistent and chronic phenomena. Of the respondents who experienced flooding and storms (n=1,078), nearly a third (31%) endured impacts for over four years before displacement, showing long-term erosion of resilience.
Destruction of housing is the leading trigger of internal displacement. 80% of flood-affected respondents left after experiencing loss of or damage to their houses. Destruction of or damage to infrastructure (48%) and crop loss (43%) are also major triggers.
Immobility is a marker of vulnerability. Among respondents who had members of their household stay behind in climate-affected locations of origin (n=509), financial barriers (51%), caregiving responsibilities (49%), and caring for land (46%) were key reasons for remaining in high-risk areas.
Environmental change is one of the issues fuelling conflict. 25% of respondents linked climate change to conflict. These respondents (n=288) most commonly linked climate change to war, armed conflict, and terrorism (55%), crime (52%), and intercommunal clashes (45%).
People displaced by climate hazards face multiple and severe protection risks. Just under half (44%) of respondents reported having travelled through a dangerous location during their displacement; among these respondents (n=497), the top perceived risks were physical violence (84%) and death (74%). Moreover, 30% of all respondents reported at least one direct experience of abuse and harm; they experienced an average of nearly six different types of abuses.
Children displaced by climate hazards face acute exposure to grave protection risks. 65% of respondents perceived children as being exposed to abuse and harm during their displacement. Among these respondents (n=741), 69% perceived that children were at risk of kidnapping and another 69% of physical violence; others expressed concern over the risk of sexual violence (55%) and trafficking and exploitation (48%).
Humanitarian needs are widespread and unmet. 83% of respondents required assistance at the time of the interview and another 43% had needed assistance but not received it during their displacement. Those with unmet assistance needs at time of interview (n=491) had been most in need of shelter (90%), food (86%), and medical care (79%).
Early warning coverage is patchy. 52% of respondents had no access to an early warning system, however, where they existed, people usually took precautionary measures. Among respondents who had access (n=538), 71% relocated temporarily and 35% strengthened their houses and shelters.
Adaptation efforts are limited and often unsuccessful. A minority of respondents attempted climate adaptations by changing their crops (39%) and livestock (29%). Among those who tried (n=441 and n=330 respectively), losses were high: 38% suffered total crop loss and 42% total livestock loss.
The findings from this paper are used to inform high-level policy dialogues on climate mobility organised in Nairobi and Addis Ababa, as well as national and regional trainings and capacity-building sessions with civil society organisations, local authorities, and regional research and academic institutions, all convened under the MECMEA project.
