CaLP Asia Cash Transfer Programming and Persons of Concern Workshop Centre Point Hotel Chidlom Bangkok, Thailand 14-15 March 2016

Livelihoods & Persons of Concern Background Nearly half of refugees in world today are caught in protracted situations with bleak durable solutions Increase in new conflicts and natural disasters Humanitarian imperative to actively seek self-reliance strategies Reappraise protracted refugee settings through a self- reliance lens Create enabling environment - working with governments of countries of asylum to expand opportunities for refugees, encouraging host communities to be part of the solution IDPs and returnees very different situation to refugees

Three theories of change Theory 1 is built around the traditional care and maintenance model – with a strong emphasis on relatively swift achievement of ‘durable solutions’.This remains the most straightforward assistance model for the displaced. The care and maintenance model is built around the expectation of achieving a durable solution (repatriation/return, local integration, third country resettlement/settlement elsewhere in the country for IDPs). It is most often associated with refugees and IDPs in camp situations and tends to focus on protection and basic needs, including food and nutrition, education, health and shelter. Theory 2 accepts the reality of longer displacement and the cost implications of open-ended humanitarian assistance, while still implicitly preparing for return or another durable solution. Theory 3 goes further in implicitly accepting the inevitability that many people in situations of protracted displacement will gravitate towards de facto integration or onward migration. The possibility of pursuing self-reliance and livelihood activities under one or more of these three theories of change is to some extent shaped by the external environment of a specific displacement situation: the legal and policy framework, the extent of conflict or violence, the geographic location, donor funding, the dynamism of the surrounding economy, etc. One is not easier than another, nor does pursuing one exclude trying others simultaneously. In most situations of protracted displacement, needs vary among the displaced depending on vulnerability, opportunities for work, expectations of return, existing social capital, etc. As such, ideal interventions to support self-reliance and livelihoods would probably involve all three theories of change. The three traditional durable solutions for refugees refer to repatriation, local integration or third-country resettlement. The equivalent for IDPs would be return to place of origin, local integration, or permanent settlement elsewhere in their country.

Enhancing Self-Reliance in Protracted Refugee Situations UNHCR & WFP Draft Joint Strategy Strengthen livelihoods while ensuring basic food and nutrition needs are met Sphere of control – more focus on a self-reliance lens through programming Encourage an enabling environment for increased self-reliance for refugees Sphere of influence – Work with governments of countries of asylum to expand opportunities for refugees, engage more strategically with actors and encourage host communities to be part of the solution. UNHCR and WFP synthesis report leading to joint strategy “Strengthen livelihoods while ensuring basic food and nutrition needs are met” The first objective is very much focussed on opportunities that lie within UNHCR and WFP’s sphere of control. At this level, UNHCR and WFP will work, in a coordinated manner, to reappraise protracted refugee situations through a self-reliance lens, re-orient themselves more directly towards self-reliance goals and dovetail into markets and other development programmes for greater sustainability.   “Encourage an enabling environment for increased self-reliance for refugees” The second objective is focussed much more on opportunities that may be present within UNHCR and WFP’s sphere of influence. At this level, UNHCR and WFP will work, in a coordinated manner, with governments of countries of asylum to expand opportunities for refugees, engage more strategically with the wider UN system and other development actors and encourage host communities to be part of the solution. Self-reliance The ability of individuals, households or communities to meet their essential needs and enjoy social and economic rights in a sustainable manner and with dignity. Protracted situation – more than 5 years with no sign of a durable solution

Sustainable Livelihood Framework (DFID)

WFP LIVELIHOODS EXAMPLES AFGHANISTAN: Cash for Assets & Vocational Skills training for IDPs Challenges of KYC and ID PHILIPPINES: Mindanao agricultural livelihoods projects for returnees Targeting based on vulnerability rather than status MYANMAR: Resettled IDPs in Northern Shan state – road renovations and fish pond construction, reduces negative coping mechanisms PAKISTAN: IDPs displaced from the North Waziristan Agency – CBT for livestock training

KEY CHALLENGES Legal status to work Access to documentation Cut off from labour markets leading to negative coping strategies, risky livelihoods, protection risks and exploitation Employed in dangerous tasks, lower pay than host population Limited land access for farming or grazing limits livelihood opportunities

Opportunities for livelihoods engagement •Involvement and empowerment of displacement communities and their hosts – refugees and IDPs often integrated within vibrant and complex economic systems • The frequent need for a combination of humanitarian and development inputs – funding cycles • Livelihood value chain assessment– not tokenism, need scale and strategic use of livelihoods, shift in dynamic to what is marketable • Building on the existing skills and strategies of displaced people • Protection of workers – insurance • Working creatively within restrictive policy frameworks Context specific, taking into account legal barriers, local economic conditions, refugees’ socio-economic profiles, available public and private services, and the degree of interaction with the host communities.

Thank You