Laying the foundations for sustainable return and reintegration in Ukraine

Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine in 2022 triggered the fastest and largest displacement crisis in Europe in recent history. Yet the crisis did not start in 2022. Displacement began in 2014 and has continued to shape the lives of millions. Preparing for the return and reintegration of the people displaced both inside and outside the country will therefore be central to Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction, yet this issue is often treated as one that can wait until the war ends.

This is understandable. Safe, large-scale returns are not possible while the security situation remains highly unstable. At the same time, return and reintegration are not just challenges for the future; in fact, returns are already taking place. By 2025, more than four million displaced Ukrainians were estimated to have returned, mostly from internal displacement and largely during the first year of the war. Return and reintegration are therefore not hypothetical. They are already happening and will continue to do so unevenly over time.

Equally importantly, many of the conditions that will make future return sustainable need long-term preparation. International experience shows that decisions taken years in advance shape whether return and reintegration succeed or fail.

Housing availability, access to employment, social cohesion and local recovery all need early attention. Waiting until the end of the war risks delaying reintegration far into the future.

Decisions about returning home are influenced by many factors, and not all of them can be shaped through policy. Family connections, emotional ties and a sense of belonging all play an important role, yet these deeply personal motivations lie largely beyond the direct reach of public policy. Considering other factors though, there are key domains where policy choices can make a meaningful difference, notably in the economic and housing spheres. OECD analysis confirms that job opportunities and adequate housing in Ukraine have been key enablers of return. They are also essential for smooth reintegration and for reducing the likelihood that people leave again after returning. Yet these are precisely the areas where the war and displacement crisis have exposed and deepened existing challenges. 

The conflict has highlighted long-standing weaknesses in Ukraine’s housing system, especially around rental market regulation and the limited scale of social housing. Data from Ukraine shows big differences in current housing status among displaced and non‑displaced groups. Fewer than 10% of internally displaced people own their homes (compared to over 60% among non-displaced groups and returnees), indicating a heavy reliance on rental housing or hosting arrangements. This dependence is heightened by the fact that many displaced households come from areas where return may not be possible for some time due to occupation, destruction, or the presence of landmines and unexploded ordnance. So even when displaced people have formal ownership, long-term rental solutions are likely to remain essential for these households. The share of housing that is rented has in fact increased to about 14% (from only 4% in 2022). However, the absence of regulation in this sector has led to a rapid expansion of informal renting that has left many tenants with limited protection and deepening insecurity, especially for displaced families.

Social housing has also long been in short supply. Before the war, it played only a small role in Ukraine’s housing system and international experience shows us how this can be extremely problematic. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, for example, limited affordable housing after the Yugoslav Wars made sustainable return extremely difficult. Displacement had not only depleted savings and disrupted employment, but many returnees struggled to access loans, increasing the need for publicly supported housing solutions. Large‑scale reforms took many years to develop.

For Ukraine, the lesson is clear: building a sustainable and inclusive social housing system must begin early.

Housing alone, however, does not guarantee return and reintegration. Housing built without access to jobs, services and transport can prove unsustainable. In the Western Balkans, for example, homes were rebuilt in areas where there were few employment opportunities, resulting in many people moving away again because they could not find work. For Ukraine, this means housing reconstruction must be closely linked to regional development and labour market recovery. Prioritising areas with economic potential will help ensure that people who return can rebuild their lives where they choose to live.

This also requires sustained investment in skills and human capital. Many returnees will not be able to return to the same jobs or sectors they worked in before the war. Reskilling and employment support will be essential, particularly in sectors central to recovery such as construction, energy, health and local services. Recovery efforts from the international community therefore need to go beyond physical infrastructure. Supporting skills development will be just as important, an area where international partners have a key role to play alongside national authorities. 

While public authorities and international organisations play a central role in early reintegration efforts, long-term job creation will largely depend on the private sector. Governments alone cannot meet the scale of upskilling and reskilling required for reconstruction. Ensuring the active involvement of employers in training, recruitment and skills recognition is therefore essential.

This will not happen automatically. Experience from OECD countries shows that providing incentives can encourage employers to invest in training and recruitment. This can include wage and training subsidies, tax incentives, preferential loans and individual learning accounts. These measures take time to deliver results, highlighting the need to plan early.

Preparing for sustainable return therefore requires a shift in perspective. It is not about waiting for the right moment to act, but about ensuring that reconstruction choices made today widen the options available to people who may wish to come home in the future. Housing that is affordable, well-located and linked to strong local economies benefits everyone, whether displaced or not. By integrating return considerations into housing and employment policies now, Ukraine and its partners can help ensure that when large-scale return does become possible, it is not only safe, but sustainable.

For a comprehensive analysis of Ukraine’s return and reintegration challenges, including policy options on housing, employment, public services and engagement with Ukrainians abroad, see the OECD's report on Ukraine’s Strategic Response to the Displacement Crisis.