No

• Between 23–29 October 2024, attacks in Mueda, Muidumbe, and Mocimboa da Praia displaced 2,073 individuals; urgent needs include food, shelter, and NFIs, as detailed in Movement Alert #115.
• Displacement trends between 23–29 October 2024 show a spike at 1,008 individuals on 27 October, indicating intensified movement due to increased attacks and fear of violence.
• Movement patterns show Chapa (Oumba) to Chapa (Nanhala) as the largest displacement flow with 1,667 individuals, alongside smaller movements from Diaca, Mapate, and Mbau to nearby safer areas, highlighting the spread of displacement within local communities.

Since October 8 there has been an increase in cross-border incidents between Israel and Lebanon, resulting in the displacement of people both within the South and elsewhere within the country. Since October 10, the Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) has been conducting the daily monitoring of population movements. The objective of the exercise is to inform preparedness and response planning.

Key Highlights

• The total number of movements observed in August rose by four per cent when compared to July. Movements between Zimbabwe and South Africa saw a four per cent increase, while those between Zimbabwe and Zambia grew by three per cent. Most of the migrants interviewed (91%) were Zimbabwean nationals, four per cent were Zambians, and two per cent held dual citizenship in South Africa and Zimbabwe. The primary reason for movement for most migrants (25%) remains family reunification.
• 36,550 movements were documented, and 1,255 migrants (51% female and 49% male) were interviewed at 20 Flow Monitoring Points (FMPs) in Zimbabwe
• The leading sending districts were Beitbridge (47%), Harare (11%), and Chiredzi (9%), whereas the main receiving districts were Harare (27%), Beitbridge (15%), and Bulawayo (11%).
• Of the migrants who indicated that they were travelling to access services at their intended destination, 80 per cent were seeking health services. The most sought healthcare services included general medical care (50%) and chronic illness care (23%).
• Notably, 80 per cent of the migrants seeking care for chronic illnesses were female, and 60 per cent of this group fell between the ages of 56 and 65.
• For migrants heading to South Africa, the primary reasons cited for choosing it as their final destination were favourable socio-economic conditions (31%), returning to their current jobs or securing new employment (31%), and reuniting with family members (23%).
• For those residing in Zimbabwe, the main shocks were drought (27%), job/income loss (24%), and health issues (23%). Most Zimbabwean migrants affected by drought resided in Mwenezi district (51%) and Gutu district (9%).

Key Highlights 

• During the reported period, a total of 30,709 movements. Of these, 55% were males and 45% were females. There were 449 pregnant women, 240 unaccompanied children, and 31 persons with a disability.
• The primary reasons for movement included family reunification (24%), returning to existing employment (18%), looking for livelihood opportunities (16%), and traveling for commercial activities (14%)1. Additionally, 66% of the migrants had identification documents.
• There was a 16% decrease in movements compared to the previous period1. The report also noted 122 persons with chronic illnesses. Among the incoming migrants, 28% were headed to Harare, while 52% of outgoing migrants had departed from Matabeleland South.
• South Africa was identified as the ultimate destination for 90% of migrants leaving Zimbabwe2. Among those traveling to South Africa, 56% were male migrants. Of the 641 migrants interviewed, 42% were aged between 26 to 35 years and 37% were between 36 to 45 years.
• For migrants traveling from Zimbabwe to Zambia, 61% were female migrants and 39% were male migrants. 32% of these migrants were aged between 36 and 45 years.
• The report also highlighted the intended length of stay for migrants traveling to South Africa: 27% planned to stay for 6 to 12 months, while 18% indicated a stay of 2 weeks to 3 months. For those traveling from South Africa to Zimbabwe, 34% planned to stay for 2 weeks to 3 months, and 28% for less than 2 weeks. 74% of migrants traveling to Zambia planned to stay for less than 2 weeks.
• Regarding identification documents, 66% of the interviewed migrants had some form of identification, with 53% being female migrants. 46% of those with documentation were aged between 36 and 45 years, while 35% were between 26 and 35 years. 410 migrants did not have any identification documents, with 52% being male migrants.
• With regards to visa types. 76 migrants held visitor's visas, and 27 were Zimbabwe Exemption permit holders. 93% of the migrants with visitor visas indicated South Africa as their current country of residence.
• In terms of socio-economic profiles, 64% of the migrants residing in Zimbabwe highlighted income-generating activities as their main source of income. 31% indicated their main source of income as salaried employees, with 52% being female migrants.
• Reasons for movement. 32% of migrants traveling to South Africa were returning to their employment places, while 26% were looking for livelihood opportunities5. For those traveling to Zambia, 41% were traveling to conduct commercial activities, and 32% were traveling to access services.
• Vulnerabilities Observed. 51% of the observed pregnant migrants were outflows, with 66% traveling to South Africa. 72% of the unaccompanied minors were incoming migrants, with 63% coming from South Africa.
• Shocks and vulnerabilities faced by migrants. The most reported shocks included family health issues (26%), death of a close family member (24%), and drought (21%). Most Zimbabwean migrants affected by drought resided in Mwenezi district (23%), Masvingo district (8%) and Chiredzi district (6%)

IOM Yemen DTM's Rapid Displacement Tracking (RDT) tool collects data on estimated numbers of households forced to flee on a daily basis from their locations of origin or displacement, allowing for regular reporting of new displacements in terms of estimated numbers, geography, and needs. It also tracks returnees who returned to their location of origin.

From 1 January to 2 November 2024, IOM Yemen DTM tracked 3,060 households (HH) (18,360 Individuals) who experienced displacement at least once.

Between 27 October and 2 November 2024, IOM Yemen DTM tracked 31 households (186 individuals) displaced at least once. The majority of people moved into/within the following governorates and districts:

• Ma'rib (22 HHs) – Ma'rib City (14 HHs), Ma'rib (4 HHs), Raghwan (2 HHs) districts. Most displacements in the governorate originated from Ibb and Al Hodeidah.
• Al Hodeidah (9 HHs) – Hays (9 HHs) district. All displacements in the governorate were internal.

The majority of people moved from the following governorates and districts:

• Al Hodeidah (13 HHs) – Al Jarrahi (6 HHs), Jabal Ras (3 HHs), At Tuhayta (2 HHs) districts.
• Ibb (5 HHs) – Al Odayn (2 HHs), As Saiyani (1 HH), Ar Radmah (1 HH) districts.
• Hajjah (4 HHs) – Harad (3 HHs), Khayran Al Muharraq (1 HH) districts.

IOM identified 47 additional households displaced in the previous reporting period, which covered 20 - 26 October 2024, in the governorates of Al Hodeidah (32 HHs), and Ma'rib (15 HHs). These figures have been added to the cumulative displacement total recorded since the beginning of the year.

This report compiles flow monitoring survey (FMS) data collected in Yemen between July and September 2024 and provides an analysis of migrants’ demographic and socio-economic profiles, including education and employment backgrounds, reasons for leaving their country of origin or habitual residence, future travel intentions and protection and challenges faced during the journey. Also included are migrants’ employment status prior to moving.

The migration routes in the southern part of Yemen are categorized along two main routes: the south-eastern route towards Shabwah, Hadramawt, and Al Maharah governorates and the north-eastern route towards Lahj and Ta’iz governorates. Both routes are travelled by a large number of migrants each year. The actions taken by Yemeni authorities against smugglers along the Lahj coastline represent a significant shift that could reshape migration dynamics in the region moving forward. Through the Flow Monitoring Registry tool, which focuses on total numbers of migrants (as opposed to the more detailed migrant profile established through the FMS).

DTM recorded 5,668 migrants entering Yemen through the south (90%) and north (10%) in the third quarter of 2024. This figure represents an increase of 14 per cent compared to the previous quarter.

During the third quarter of 2024, a total of 3,323 surveys were conducted. In Lahj (851), Al Maharah (762), Aden (589), Shabwah (525), Ma’rib (477), and Hadramawt (119). The overall number of surveys increased by two per cent since the previous quarter. The majority of respondents were young adults between the age of 16 and 25 (90%) searching for economic opportunities (96%), most of whom were single (92%), attained primary education or less (61%), were currently unemployed (96%) and departed from rural areas (56%).

Over the past several decades, frequent movements across the borders with the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan characterized much of Afghanistan’s cross-border mobility dynamics. Afghan nationals cross back and forth across these borders for a variety of reasons, including to pursue economic opportunities, to seek safety, to access healthcare, or to visit family members, in addition to other short-term travel. As of September 2024, there were an estimated 3.75 million Afghan nationals living in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and approximately 2.05 million living in Pakistan1. 

In October 2023, officials in both the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan called for the expulsion of undocumented foreign nationals. Since the majority of undocumented foreign nationals in both countries are Afghan nationals, the policies triggered increased return movements between October and December 2023. In April 2024, several media outlets in Pakistan announced a second phase of the “Illegal Foreigners’ Repatriation Plan (IFRP)”, which reportedly established a deadline for unregistered or undocumented foreigners to voluntarily return to their countries or face deportation. The government of Pakistan did not initially implement the deportation measures announced during this second phase. However, the government subsequently announced policies to implement deportations in June 2024. Additionally, Iranian officials have recently announced plans to deport two million Afghan nationals by early 2025. 

To monitor increased deportations and other forms of cross-border movement, IOM-DTM Afghanistan implemented DTM Flow Monitoring (FM) methodology to track cross-border movements, including volume, intended destinations, reasons for movement, and intended lengths of stay. This report includes data analysis on cross-border movement across the borders between Afghanistan and both Pakistan and the Islamic Republic of Iran from 01 July 2024 to 30 September 20242. 

DTM monitored 973,696 individuals entering Afghanistan, 786,769 leaving Afghanistan, and interviewed over 90,912 individuals on their reasons for movement between July and September 2024. Data was collected from 11 different crossing points at the borders with the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan. All assessed border points fall into two categories: those connected to the National Highway, or “main” crossing points, which include Islam Qala, Milak, Spin Boldak, and Torkham, and those not connected to the National Highway, which include Abu Nasr Farahi, Dak, Baramcha, Angor Ada, Ghulam Khan, Nazar Posta and Pathan. Analyses throughout the report will reflect the differences between these types of crossing points.

The following section outlines the two main methodological components: Flow Monitoring Counting (FMC) and Flow Monitoring Surveys (FMS). The report is structured in three main sections: 1) Cumulative Flow Trends, which summarizes all recorded cross-border movements, 2) Mobility Dynamics: The Islamic Republic of Iran; and 3) Mobility Dynamics: Pakistan. The second and third sections includes analyses of cross-border movements entering and exiting Afghanistan, as well as an overview of reasons for movement, travel documentation, and intended destinations. The report concludes by briefly comparing the cross-border dynamics into and from Afghanistan from both countries. 
 

DTM Flow Monitoring, conducted by IOM Afghanistan, is designed to provide insights into the mobility patterns at Afghanistan’s border points with the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan. This activity involves two interlinked exercises: Flow Monitoring Counting (FMC), which monitors the number of movements across the border, and Flow Monitoring Surveys (FMS), which collect data on the profiles of randomly selected Afghan nationals crossing the border including documentation held, reasons for travel, and the intended period of stay/ travel. It is important to note that DTM collects information on total movements at a given border point, not the number of unique individuals entering or leaving the country. As a result, if one individual both left and re-entered Afghanistan during the reporting period, this would count as one outflow movement and one inflow movement. Movements can be attributed to a wide variety of reasons, including returnees coming back to Afghanistan after living abroad, people visiting family, deportees, those travelling for economic reasons, medical patients, students, or Afghans moving abroad for different reasons. Circular movements, which include those who frequently and regularly travel back and forth across the border for trade and other reasons, are also common. This monitoring offers a clear picture of population movements in and out of the country. 

DTM FM is operational at four main crossing points (connected to Afghanistan’s National Highway) as well as six other crossing points with Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan. This weekly snapshot combines information from the FM activity and various IOM sources related to cross-border movement. For a detailed explanation of the methodology used in gathering this data, the report directs readers to the section titled “IOM INFLOW DATA” on the last page.