From “Refugee” to “Returnee”: A Novel Direction for Research

The Syrian Refugee Life Study (S-RLS) began as a longitudinal panel study in 2020 and recently completed in-person data collection in Syria for the first time in project history. CEGA Research Manager Mansi Kalra reflects on the process of navigating data collection efforts in Syria during conflict, and the team’s future plans to expand work in the region. This project was funded with UK International Development from the UK government, awarded through Innovation for Poverty Action’s Peace & Recovery Program.

Since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, roughly 3 million displaced Syrians have returned to their homes (UNHCR 2025), mainly from neighboring countries which had absorbed a large share of refugees fleeing oppression and violence. The collapse of the regime prompted one of the largest repatriation movements in the world, driven by both desires to return home and also demands by host countries to accelerate rapid return (Migration Policy Centre, 2026). Refugee returns are widely understudied, particularly because the opportunity to observe shocks spurring large-scale displacement rarely occur, and because coordinated research attempts are logistically challenging. In an effort to understand returns and inform critical policy positions, CEGA researchers leading the Syrian Refugee Life Study (S-RLS) expanded their panel study in Jordan to collect data from their sample of roughly 2,600 refugees, and notably, returnees, on return intentions, the decision making process guiding return, and social cohesion outcomes between returnees and internally displaced persons.

While results from this work are forthcoming, the process of conducting data collection in Syria itself provides important lessons. This round contained many firsts, from working within Syria to navigating research during conflict to harmonizing the panel with another similar project in Lebanon. 

Data collection in Syria

Decades of authoritarian regime control in Syria have seeded distrust of researchers gathering personal data. While the S-RLS sample consists of respondents who have participated in the survey in Jordan for more than seven years, the trust cultivated over that period did not necessarily transcend borders. This was particularly true in Syria where, until recently, surveillance and publicly sharing personal information posed a tangible safety threat. As study respondents returned to Syria, maintaining contact became increasingly difficult and hiring enumerators with similar demographics—who more easily garner respondents’ confidence—became a central priority. 

In addition to maintaining trust among respondents, the S-RLS team carefully established credibility with the Syrian government. The first order of operation was to obtain an official permit from the Syrian government to conduct data collection, an effort led by the S-RLS team’s data collection firm, Mindset. Mindset subsequently made a concerted effort to hire enumerators from the same Syrian governorates in which data collection was taking place, in an attempt to build trust with local communities and increase survey participation. This also ensured a degree of linguistic and cultural familiarity between the research team and the respondents, boosting response rates for the survey round. Majd Masannat, who leads Mindset’s work on this project, described the team’s approach to this new wave of data collection: “Since 2019, we have been tracking individuals who moved outside of Jordan, and as we now follow respondents who have returned to their home country, it is incredibly important for the continuity of the study to collect data on this new chapter of their lives. Mindset remains deeply conscious of the ever-changing landscape in Syria, and we are mindful of how we direct our field teams.”

For the latest data collection round, the S-RLS team partnered with the Immigration Policy Lab’s data team which is conducting a similar longitudinal panel study in Lebanon with Syrian refugees and returnees. Both teams harmonized portions of their surveys in an attempt to understand Syrian returnee intentions for refugees in both Jordan and Lebanon. While the bulk of the surveys captured different sets of outcomes, the teams harmonized the survey sections focused on return intentions and perceptions of Syria. 

Navigating research in a conflict zone

Data collection for this round began in January 2026, and was abruptly paused in mid-February due to new conflict in the MENA region (between Iran and the U.S.). Syria was directly impacted by the violence, and the research team had to quickly pivot to ensure the safety of the field team and participants. At the onset of conflict, the S-RLS team contacted the logistical coordinators within Syria to solicit their input on whether data collection could continue, and if so, in which governorates. This on-the-ground team was best positioned to inform decisions, and became trusted partners for the research team. At least once a week, the logistical coordinators would provide information on whether or not planned data collection could continue in a given governorate. In instances where making this decision was uncertain, the team would defer to phone survey data collection methods as opposed to in-person in an effort to prioritize safety.

Masannat from Mindset emphasized that “We place great trust in our field team’s on-the-ground expertise—they are best positioned to assess conditions and advise on safe and responsible operations.” Indeed, rather than leadership from the data collection firm or the research team making the final decisions, it was the on-the-ground field coordinators that were entrusted with this responsibility. Similarly, Marine Casalis, Research Program Director at the Immigration Policy Lab explained that: “We always make sure to consult our survey firm as well as some of our study participants beforehand. This helps us make informed decisions and guarantee the safety of our respondents.”

Data collection was paused for roughly two weeks, and when conditions were safe to resume, Ramadan was fast approaching. While the original goal had been to complete data collection prior to the holiday, the S-RLS team decided to pause until the end of Ramadan to ensure respect of respondents who would participate in religious activities during that time. Overall this resulted in about a month delay in data collection, but ultimately resulted in higher response rates and cultivated trust with communities.

It’s all about trust

Conducting data collection in a conflict-impacted region requires agile operational capacity, flexibility, and clear communication. Most importantly, it requires trust: building trust with study respondents by assembling a field team of locals and carefully considering cultural and religious activities; establishing credibility with government partners by ensuring that necessary permissions are secured; instilling confidence in field teams who are best-positioned to make real-time logistical and safety decisions; and fostering collaboration across all levels of the research team by establishing shared protocols that insulate for bumps without compromising quality—enabling, for example, quick transitions to phone surveys and the ability to stop and start data collection, as needed. 

Managing this methodological complexity—ensuring consistency where it matters for comparability while adapting where the context demands it—is an ongoing challenge, especially in conflict affected contexts. Still, trust and clear communication with all stakeholders—from respondents and field-teams, to researchers, bilaterals, and funders—allow the team to make mindful decisions that preserve project integrity (even if they sometimes result in delays). 

One important piece of feedback received from participants was that returnees no longer identified with the term “refugee,” and thus the project name, the Syrian Refugee Life Study, felt isolating. Thus, in an effort to recognize this change and to reflect the project ambitions going forward, the team is making a small terminological change to the Syrian and Refugee Life Study. This modest adjustment more accurately represents the refugee participants who are still in Jordan, and the returnees who simply identify as Syrian. 

Documenting how to run complex surveys in conflict-affected settings and how to safely, respectfully, and effectively follow people across the full arc of displacement will shape the next phase of S-RLS’ work can provide valuable lessons for conducting fieldwork, especially in unstable and fragile contexts.