Stronger Aid Responses, Business Incentives, Localized Programmes, Key to Reducing Vulnerability among Displaced Populations, Economic and Social Council Told
Effectively reaching the world’s most vulnerable populations required breaking down silos within international organizations and shaping new ways of bettering the lives of millions, speakers said as the Economic and Social Council moved into the second day of its humanitarian affairs segment.
The segment, held under the theme “Restoring Humanity and Leaving No One Behind: Working together to reduce people’s humanitarian need, risk and vulnerability”, featured two panel discussions focusing on forced displacement and on joint action to reduce need, risk and vulnerability. Among the issues straddling both discussions were ways to fine-tune work within existing parameters while crafting innovative, sustainable solutions that would plug resource, technology and capacity gaps to overcome pressing challenges.
Some of those challenges involved swiftly and efficiently addressing the plight of vulnerable populations, including an unprecedented 65 million people driven from their homes by conflict and an addition 20 to 25 million displaced by the consequences of climate change.
During the panel on “Leaving No One Behind: Addressing Forced Displacement”, Stephen O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, who moderated both discussions, said that, while displacement was often considered an exclusively humanitarian issue, it was also a paramount political and development challenge as it was often protracted. Tackling displacement required stronger humanitarian, development and political response, as well as acknowledging the generosity of the countries and communities on the front lines.
As such, he continued, international organizations and their bilateral partners must support efforts to reduce protracted displacement, put in place predictable financing arrangements, create incentives for business communities and promote localized programmes. That meant working more collaboratively across silos towards collective outcomes that reduced the vulnerabilities of the displaced. He urged the Council to build on the commitments made at the World Humanitarian Summit, held in Istanbul in May, especially in equitable responsibility sharing and to support the Secretary-General’s campaign against xenophobia in that context.
To do that, shifting mindsets, identifying collective outcomes and using “new” language and approaches were among the critical tools that could translate globally agreed commitments into improvements in the lives of people facing poverty, war and suffering around the world, speakers said during the panel on “Moving Beyond Business as Usual: Working together to reduce need, risk and vulnerability”.
During that discussion, Mr. O’Brien provided examples of recent efforts. They included the African Risk Capacity to increase risk insurance in Africa, the Stockholm Declaration on strengthening the humanitarian-development nexus and the United Nations Agencies’ Commitment to Action on transcending humanitarian-development divides.
“Many of these ideas are not new,” he said. “What is new is the scale of need, the diversity and scope of capacity at the local and national levels and the global political commitment to change.” Today, the world was facing a once-in-a-generation opportunity, he said, pointing out that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change were among the most prominent signals of the momentum that was building on that front, he said.
During the interactive discussion, panellists said the commitments made at the Summit had reflected some of those new approaches and ways of thinking. One speaker called the Summit an accelerator, adding that the United Nations Summit on Refugees and Migrants, to be held in September, must move the current mindset from a notion of recognition of the challenges to one where action was key.
The Economic and Social Council will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 29 June, to conclude its humanitarian affairs segment.
Panel I
A panel discussion on “Moving Beyond Business as Usual: Working together to reduce need, risk and vulnerability” was moderated by Stephen O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator. It featured the following panellists: David Nabarro, Adviser to the Secretary‑General on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; Smruti Patel, Interim Executive Director, Network for Empowered Aid Response; Jemilah Mahmood, Under-Secretary-General for Partnerships, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies; Amir Mahmoud Abdulla, Deputy Executive Director, World Food Programme (WFP); and Nazanin Ash, Vice-President, Public Policy and Advocacy, International Rescue Committee.
Mr. O’BRIEN introduced the topic, saying “we cannot continue business as usual”. Commitments that had been made at the World Humanitarian Summit to support people in reducing their risk, need and vulnerability were bolstering social protection measures with a view to limiting the impact of shocks.
Among those efforts were the African Risk Capacity to increase risk insurance in Africa, the Stockholm Declaration on strengthening the humanitarian-development nexus and the United Nations Agencies’ Commitment to Action on transcending humanitarian-development divides, launched in May by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), World Health Organization (WHO), Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, WFP, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and endorsed by the World Bank and the International Organization for Migration (IOM).
“Many of these ideas are not new,” he said. “What is new is the scale of need, the diversity and scope of capacity at the local and national levels and the global political commitment to change.” Today, the world was facing a once-in-a-generation opportunity. The 2030 Agenda, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change were among the most prominent signals of the momentum that was building on that front.
Turning to the panellists, he asked each expert to highlight challenges and solutions. He first asked what needed to be done and by whom to better connect humanitarian and development efforts to achieve collective outcomes that reflected the 2030 Agenda principles and the best way to work with Governments to do so.
Mr. NABARRO said the recently adopted instruments were a gift because they represented agreement among all 193 United Nations Member States. The agreements were universal, indivisible and inclusive, with a notion that humanitarian action centred on leaving no one behind. Taking forward the Sustainable Development Goals meant integrating that action into all efforts, and doing that required thinking, working and reporting in new ways.
Mr. O’BRIEN then asked what needed to be truly “new” in ways of working and what challenges existed to taking such action in order to ensure accountability.
Ms. PATEL said a huge amount of capacities existed alongside deficits. Recognizing those capacities and supporting them could be accomplished through equitable partnerships. Support for organizations to assist their communities was important, as was providing the necessary resources to do so. The great underinvestment in national capacities must be addressed through approaches that were effective and sustainable. Reporting on those efforts should be transparent and global and national-level tracking systems should be established to answer whether or not aid was getting to communities. Innovative pool funds for local and national actors were also needed.
Mr. O’BRIEN turned to local efforts, asking how networks could work more effectively.
Ms. MAHMOOD said local action was at the centre of how the Federation operated. Its 165,000 local branches met the front-line response, with 17 million volunteers playing a critical part. A mindset shift needed to allow local organizations to lead, with the Federation and other such organizations playing a supporting role. Previous patronizing attitudes towards local organizations must change. One of the benefits of local networks was understanding context, she said, regretting to add that the goodwill of international action had sometimes been met with alarming local reactions, claiming that “they don’t know what we need”. While the goal was to be efficient, it was important to realize the role local actors played and that good programme and financing management was crucial. For its part, the Federation had a pool fund, rapidly deploying funding over the past 30 years, and was working with countries to ensure legal preparedness to promote coordination and national ownership.
She said the seeds of the Federation’s “One Billion Coalition for Resilience” had begun in 2014 and today it was important to define what success meant and to shift the discussion. The Coalition was about building resilience to save lives and realizing the potential of collective networks. Moving forward, technology must be leveraged and the rhetoric of resiliency must translate into action that met the demands of the Sustainable Development Goals.
Mr. O’BRIEN asked for a description of how the new way of working under the Commitment to Action would unfold in the field and how United Nations agencies could transition towards delivering collective outcomes while retaining emergency capacities in situations of conflict.
Mr. ABDULLA said that going forward changes in action and mind-set were needed that employed a new way of working to truly address the challenges of reaching those furthest behind. One quarter of all children had preventable chronic malnutrition, and to address that and other challenges, it was necessary to move beyond short-term responses. Business as usual was no longer effective in building resilience. A shift must be made to manage, not just respond to, risk.
Continuing, he said a good example of long-term efforts could be seen in Ethiopia’s drought response, which had been delivered through national systems. Relief was critical, but it was very important to protect recent development gains. The Government of Ethiopia had recognized that its national systems must be strengthened. While that could not be done in all countries, where it could be, it should be, he said.
Mr. O’BRIEN then asked how the International Rescue Committee fit into the broader system in terms of outcome areas.
Ms. ASH said displaced populations represented a large percentage of people most in need. For instance, before the Syrian crisis, 1 per cent of Syrians lived in extreme poverty, while today about 30 per cent did. Reaching those populations was a challenge, as was finding them and giving them a voice. The Summit had achieved a “pivot” in looking at the current challenges, including the protracted nature of conflict and crises. However, defining the outcomes sought was critical. Achieving collective outcomes, such as literacy, required joint assessments, planning, common reporting and accountability frameworks. For its part, the Committee had focused on health, education, safety, economic well-being and other areas and had worked to identify what efforts had triggered the most positive results. Such evidence, however, was not readily available, as it was more common to report on, for instance, the quantity of food delivered. Those research and evidence gaps must be addressed, she said, noting that the Committee was working to do so.
Mr. NABARRO said new language and new interactions were needed, including the term “ecosystem”, referencing a system representing a broad range of humanitarian actors, and the notion of collective action, rather than thinking of organizations as “us” and “them”.
Participants then joined the discussion from the floor and from the Pigeonhole online interactive question-and-answer platform, asking a range of questions on how to put those notions into action, from supporting local actors to building trust.
Ms. MAHMOOD, responding to a question on how to build trust, provided an example. In a crisis situation, she said, instead of hiring the best staff to get the job done, that person should be hired to accompany others in a way that fostered a deeply professional relationship among partners.
The most popular question on Pigeonhole was whether it was feasible to think that donors could fund local actors directly and what were some viable mechanisms to support localization.
Mr. ABDULLA said most important was assured funding that arrived swiftly and reliably. Local actors must be on hand, from initial responses to longer-term efforts.
Ms. PATEL, also addressing that question, said funding local actors directly was feasible and a national fund should be established to ensure the swift dispersal of necessary resources.
Panellists were then asked, via Pigeonhole, what initial, practical steps were needed to get humanitarian workers, the private sector, development enterprises, local organizations and other partners working together.
Ms. ASH said a formal process should be identified for collective outcomes under discussion today. If common goals relied on evidence on how to achieve them together, then decisions should be made on who should be the one to achieve them. For instance, to address malnutrition in children, evidence must be analysed and cost-effective efforts should be supported in a people-centred, not mandate-centred, approach to achieve a shared outcome. “There’s nothing stopping us from doing this,” she said.
Via the Internet, the International Federation for Family Development asked how family perspective policy recommendations could help to tackle humanitarian crisis as a holistic approach towards moving beyond business as usual.
Ms. PATEL said taking a family approach was essential in looking at needs. A family approach would also help them thrive and not just survive.
Mr. ABDULLA said assessments should include what families needed, putting them at the centre in order to normalize their lives.
Online queries also addressed concern about conflict and development. One question asked whether, in situations where a state of crisis was prolonged, such as the refugee crisis and the Syrian conflict, the focus should remain centred on immediate aid, and if not, at what point did development become the primary goal.
Ms. MAHMOOD said the primary goal in interventions was saving lives, with immediate aid efforts followed by long-term initiatives.
Mr. ABDULLA said the primary goal must be building resilience and removing risk and vulnerability for affected populations. Certainly, live-saving aid was needed, but it should begin to lay the groundwork for resilience-building.
A representative of UNHCR said major shifts could be seen in the landscape of working with people who had been forcibly replaced. A longer-term horizon for efforts was needed, as was a change in engagements, moving from national refugee agencies to ministries of education, finance, health and related sectors. Shifts were also needed to expedite responses and improve capacity to better understand the ecosystem of actors, she said.
Ms. ASH said the Summit was an accelerator and the United Nations Summit on Refugees and Migrants to be held in September must move from a notion of recognition of the challenges to one where action was key.
Also participating in the panel discussion were ministers, high-level officials and representatives of South Africa and Brazil. A representative of the non-governmental organization World Federation for Mental Health also participated.
Panel II
A panel discussion on “Leaving No One Behind: Addressing forced displacement” was moderated by Stephen O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator. It featured presentations by Paula Gaviria, Presidential High Commissioner for Human Rights, Colombia; Iván Brenes Reyes, President, National Commission on Risk Reduction and Emergency Response, Costa Rica; Volker Türk, Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, UNHCR; and Chaloka Beyani, Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons.
Opening the panel, Mr. O’BRIEN said a record 65 million people — the size of the population of France — had been displaced by conflict and violence, two thirds of them — 40 million people — within their own country. Beside conflict, an additional 20 to 25 million had been displaced by natural disaster or climate change. They wanted safety for their families, jobs, education and the ability to contribute to their communities.
Too often, he said, displacement was considered a purely humanitarian issue. Yet, it was also a paramount political and development challenge, as it was often protracted. Tackling displacement required stronger humanitarian, development and political response, as well as acknowledging the generosity of the countries and communities on the front lines. The Secretary-General had set the objective to halve the number of internally displaced persons by 2030.
Governments must have long-term strategies, he said, integrate displaced people into their development plans and strengthen legal frameworks. International organizations and their partners must support efforts to reduce protracted displacement, by putting in place predictable financing arrangements, creating incentives for business and promoting localized programmes — in other words, work more collaboratively across silos towards outcomes that reduced vulnerabilities. He urged the Council to build on the commitments made at the World Humanitarian Summit, especially in equitable responsibility sharing, and to support the Secretary-General’s campaign against xenophobia in that context.
Ms. GAVIRIA said Colombia was fulfilling a commitment made at the Summit to end one of humankind’s most protracted conflicts. On 23 June, it had reached a cessation of hostilities agreement with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), ending a war that had caused more than 260,000 deaths and displaced 6 million people. Parties to conflict should seek negotiated agreements, she said, noting that years of negotiations with FARC had opened the door to halving the number of people displaced and Colombia looked forward to further reductions. The Government had provided financial compensation to almost 600,000 victims, the highest amount in the world, as well as to 400 indigenous, rural and Afro-Colombian communities. Further, it had rolled out programmes that aimed to bring about economic stabilization for displaced people. The Government had invested $104 million in humanitarian assistance, reaching 1.4 million households affected by the conflict.
Mr. REYES said Costa Rica had engaged in a 25-year process, which had begun with the adoption of the Yokohama, Hyogo and Sendai disaster reduction frameworks. Legislators had reformed the emergency law, and in 2005, adopted law 8488, providing the establishment of a national disaster management system focused on prevention. Such efforts went hand-in-hand with sectoral actions to shift the country towards prevention. More broadly, Costa Rica offered capacity-building to key actors, making it easier to foster public-private partnerships, as well as avenues for enhancing skills development, so that peoples’ knowledge, understanding and attitudes could move to a prevention mindset. As work with grass-roots communities was a cornerstone of a preventive approach, the Government provided advice and operational capacity-building to local bodies and monitored results. It also involved civil society in disaster risk reduction and management. As a middle-income country, Costa Rica was not involved in cross-border programmes. However, those countries always had to be part of the conversation.
Mr. BEYANI said there were two reasons why the numbers of internally displaced persons were increasing, citing first the failure to prevent new displacement and address root causes. Poverty, marginalization, violence and armed conflict were among elements to be addressed. For conflict-induced internally displaced people, the main cause was a lack of respect for international humanitarian law, meaning that internal protection mechanisms must be enhanced. As for disaster-induced displacement, there was little preparedness for it. Often the poor were reluctant to evacuate, as they would lose everything. The second reason was the failure to address protracted displacement. The remedy required strong political leadership, State cooperation and working through national systems, both humanitarian and development. It also required integrating internally displaced persons into national social protection systems, building on local capacity and knowledge. There was a tendency to close sites for internally displaced persons and equate that with durable solutions, which only caused further suffering. He was encouraged by the strong will expressed by the range of stakeholders at the Summit.
Mr. TÜRK said the magnitude, scope and complexity of forced displacement had become a daily reality for millions of people. On one hand, there had been a strong civil society and host community response to people fleeing across borders or displaced within their own countries. On the other, xenophobia was playing a dangerous role in populist politics and he advocated a strong response that built on the normative framework, urging respect for and strengthening of the international refugee regime established in the wake of the Second World War. “Whatever we’re doing, it has to be built on that,” he stressed. It was difficult to find access to education and jobs and to reunite families. Refugees in Greece, for example, wished to reunite with family in Europe. “We need open complementary pathways for country admission,” he said, such as education and eased requirements for family reunification. Without such efforts, people would resort to smugglers. He hoped that both the General Assembly migration summit and the conference hosted by the United States President in the next few months would lead to a more equitable responsibility-sharing framework — a global compact for refugees.
In the ensuing dialogue, speakers expressed concern about the well-being of people forced to flee their homes, stressing that it was crucial to follow through on the World Humanitarian Summit commitments. Many expressed hope that the Assembly’s 19 September meeting on migration would build on the World Humanitarian Summit, with the representatives of the European Union and United States representatives citing global responsibility sharing in that regard.
Protracted displacement had become the new norm, the United Kingdom’s delegate said, with developing countries hosting 86 per cent of refugees. Thought must be given to ways to support that “global good”, notably through offering people ways to become self-reliant and investing in education.
Speakers also stressed the need to address the root causes of forced displacement, which often stemmed from human rights abuses, as well as failures in governance and the rule of law, with Switzerland’s delegate urging respect of international humanitarian law.
Mr. BEYANI, asked by Mr. O’Brien, said the best way to help displaced people was to keep them visible. Because they were within States, there was a feeling they were not actually a problem. However, there was a dynamic relationship between internally displaced persons, refugees and migrants. Questions hinged on the nature of displacement and persecution suffered in each context. Often, States did not know how many internally displaced persons were within their borders. Data collection was also important, he said, also citing the need to strengthen protection systems. States with internally displaced populations had shared with him their expertise in addressing the problems, which he hoped would continue as he exited the mandate.
To a question on how to distinguish between global responsibility and national sovereignty, posed to panellists by people around the world through a “pigeonhole” system, and echoed by Japan’s representative, Ms. GAVIRIA pointed to political will. States bore the main responsibility to reform the national architecture for refugees and internally displaced people. Human dignity must be at its centre. Colombia had a database of 8 million victims, 6 million of them of displacement. It was working to raise awareness of victims and involve them in decisions on political and public life. Sixty victims had travelled to Havana to participate directly in ongoing negotiations there. They had presented proposals at the negotiation table and through victims’ representatives’ forums. Hearing those voices was essential to improving the situation.
Mr. REYES said that, irrespective of the circumstances that led to displacement, human beings must be at the centre of all efforts to respond to migration. Evolving humanitarian support must be guaranteed.
Mr. BEYANI, to a question from Iraq’s delegate — on why he had not accepted Government requests to accompany him and to correct inaccuracies in his report — said the State bore the primary responsibility to provide assistance to internally displaced persons, which was an issue of sovereignty. Sovereignty was seen as carrying a responsibility, not an abdication of protection. In international law, sovereignty was not an excuse for discharging from such obligations.
Sovereignty must be exercised to protect internally displaced persons within State territory, he said, notably by designating a focal point, which was often lacking. That role carried multisectoral and ministerial responsibilities for food, housing, health — including reproductive health — education and employment. His mandate was to ask how each country’s system worked and to share experiences to ensure that a States responded appropriately. Profiling was also important, but also not often carried out. His mandate was to draw the attention to any gaps.
Moreover, he said, sovereignty was seen in relation to States, as well as to the international system as embodied in the United Nations. Internally displaced persons must have the freedom to speak with him. When in the presence of Government representatives, they often felt intimidated and did not speak. If they did not have a sponsor in Baghdad, they did not have access to safety. As for changes to his report, he said the Human Rights Council did not have services to translate those comments from Arabic into English, and therefore, he had been unable to engage with them.
Mr. TÜRK added that, to address internal displacement, “you need to make it an issue of political leadership”. It then would become a question of law and policy. To a question by Portugal’s delegate on how to provide alternative pathways to education, said half of the world’s refugee children were in primary school, one third were in secondary school, and a huge problem in retaining girls and young women, which, in turn, affected tertiary education.
Citing gains, he said Germany had a programme that helped students in refugee areas access education and scholarships in their host countries. And since 30 March, countries including France, Costa Rica, Canada, Qatar, Germany, Japan and Morocco had expressed their willingness to help on the education front. The “perennial protection gap” must be addressed by ensuring countries could rely on international support when it faced an influx of refugees, notably through commitments to the normative framework and a comprehensive response initiated early in the situation.
To a question on the merits of establishing an international legal instrument for displaced persons, Mr. BEYANI said the three branches of law — international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international refugee law — did not only apply to internally displaced persons, but also to refugees. For example, Palestinian refugees in the Yarmouk camp in Syria were internationally protected persons, according to international humanitarian law. International refugee law was a product of the Second World War to protect those fearing persecution. War or conflict was a means of persecution. There were important connections. For example, there should be a continuance of non-refoulement from internally displaced person to refugee situations. Determining refugee status was an exercise of responsibility — so was protection.
To a question on the type of financing, policy and operational tools needed to address protracted displacement, Ms. GAVIRIA urged better coordination by United Nations agencies on the ground, which would ensure more impactful actions, because response could be collectively resourced. It was also important to strengthen the local bodies with which United Nations agencies worked. Importantly, she urged a focus on mental health, noting that 50 per cent of the victims in Colombia had requested psychosocial support and a raft of responses were required to address those requests. “That is a form of empowerment” and human dignity, she said.
Mr. REYES underlined the need to improve resilience, in communities and the response to them, across the board. When small countries received waves of migrants, the differences of those people must be taken into account, as they all had different needs. They were not all “cut from the same cloth”.
Mr. TÜRK, to a question on creating efficiencies, said that in protracted refugee situations, a paradigm shift was taking place in terms of engagement by international financial institutions. The World Bank, for example, had done needs assessments in Jordan, Lebanon, the Lake Chad Basin and areas where concessional loans were important for addressing the key issues, such as infrastructure, at the heart of building the resilience of host countries.