LINKING RELIEF REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GROUPE URD Groupe URD is a French research institute whose main goal is to: Improve quality of humanitarian practices through debate, research, evaluation, capacity building, training and lobbying.

Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and development It aims to draw lessons from current experience to inform policy and programmes, for NGOs, donors, international agencies and governmental institutions. The LRRD project focuses on the 6 following sectors:  Agriculture  Irrigation and water supply  Nutrition  Health  Urban Development  Education And includes a team of 4 technical members from Groupe URD, two independent consultants, a pool of junior experts, a project coordinator, permanently based in Kabul, and scientific support from headquarter and partners in Afghanistan

Main Objectives  Learning and sharing lessons in this period of political and technical transition, through multi-sector review  Increasing and sharing knowledge and experience by carrying out applied research in rural and urban settings in specific fields (including food and economic security and urban development): - 4 different agrarian systems throughout Afghanistan - 3 cities (small/middle/big) In partnership with interested NGOs  Contributing to the capacity building efforts of the relevant ministries and Afghan NGOs through trainings

Agenda 1. Focusing on people’s needs 2. Understanding the context and linkage with policy making 3. Rebuilding the state 4. LRRD: a new set of stakeholders, new trends

A BIT OF THEORY AND MODELISATION

TYPOLOGY OF CRISESDevelopment Crisis Reconstruction Emergency Rehabilitation The Continuum theory

TYPOLOGY OF CRISES: not that simple

COMBINAISON OF PREVIOUS CASES : THE CONTIGUUM CONCEPT 2 4 4

NEED OF NEW METHODS AND APPROACHES Which can tackle the State building agenda (the peace and democracy agenda); Which can ensure that the needs of people are responded to (vulnerability agenda) and a humanitarian response capacity still preserved (the Humanitarian Space agenda) Which can ensure that a vivid civil society can develop and democracy progressively can nurture (civil and civic agenda) Which can ensure that economy will progress at the micro and macro levels (economic agenda)

FOCUSING ON PEOPLE’S NEEDS Keeping a focus on people / humanitarian needs while moving towards reconstruction and development

Vulnerabilities still need to be address Remaining vulnerabilities coexistence of Relief, Rehabilitation and Development needs high level of structural and circumstantial vulnerabilities Decreasing focus on vulnerabilities Phasing out of some « relief donors » and stakeholders Increased focus on high potential and easy accessible areas

Developing a formal space for humanitarian interventions in the development strategies Main challenges: Integrating vulnerabilities and relief issues in the current reconstruction and development frameworks Designing and implementing relevant programmes adapted to the needs and constraints for vulnerable areas and/or vulnerable population’s groups Addressing vulnerabilities in insecure areas

Integrating approaches and programmes Designing specific policies and strategies (drought mitigation, floods control) Designing specific planning and programming Designing specific action-research towards difficult areas Having formal and efficient information, decision making and intervention systems (early warning systems and preparedness plans) Long term commitments from the donors NGOs remain an important stakeholder for implementation /advocacy More holistic approach (FS or livelihoods conceptual frameworks) for assessment, monitoring and evaluation is required Main requirements (through the Food Security case study)

CONTEXT UNDERSTANDING & LINKAGE WITH POLICY MAKING To fulfil the tremendous requirements for diagnosis in order to design and adapt policies and programmes to the context complexity and diversity

Insufficient or inadequate diagnosis Limited, un-adapted and low-quality diagnosis (spatial, holistic, …) Lack of capacities and expertise Lack of coordination Challenges: Highlight the missing information of the relevant needs and their prioritization Define and implement a plan of action

Gaps between policy making and field operations A contrasted situation within the sectors Lack of interaction: NGOs are not able or not willing to participate Government and donors do not really seek for NGOs’ views Suggestions: Need to encourage relationships between policy making and field stakeholders in order to ensure that policy design is fully adapted to field’s realities Donors have a role to play in integrating NGOs in policy design processes

Gap between urban territories and urban responsibilities The post-crisis changes in urban sector result in the creation of new urban context and areas Very few updated spatial information on urban context Services are not delivered in the illegal settlements (not mapped) No common spatial references for urban planning, reconstruction and coordination between the different stakeholders Case study : Lack of spatial data in Urban sector

Some progresses in 2006 Land tenure issues are finally addressed thanks to its assignment to the Ministry of Agriculture Rehabilitation in Kabul allowed by the recent agreement between KM and MoUD (KURP) Ongoing spatial regional analysis aiming at a balance between the Urban Land and rural development (SDP) More progresses are required Further diagnosis (geographical, physical, social/technical,transport….) Establishment of a validated document compiling data Establishment of flexible city master plans Urgent need to place urban issues within a spatial and collective understanding

REBUILDING THE STATE …after a protracted crisis, and the succession of different models

Rationalisation of the state Different factors are hindering the functioning of the Afghan State: Lack of fiscal system Although efforts made, responsibilities still somewhat blurred Ministries and upper administration are still very much subject to cabinet and political changes Human resources management is not always based on competences Efforts are made to foster a rationalization of the State through the PAR and PRR processes Numerous ministries are going through the PRR process but some remain at the first stage, the second stage raising more difficulties Thus, this process should significantly improve the efficiency at national and local levels, and need to be implemented quickly in order to improve notably service delivery and therefore secure stability of the country

Ownership and accountability in the reconstruction period After the fall of Taliban, there was a sudden substantial injection of funds and a mass influx of stakeholders (donors, technical assistants, consultants, private contractors, IFI, UN agencies, NGOs): Clear effort in building and strengthening ministerial capacity and setting national programmes However, still limited ownership at all levels Donors push for quick impacts in the field (securing peace), and want to influence policies and often push for their own agendas through technical assistants On donors’ side: is there a long term commitment? On government side: still limited “absorption capacity”

Case study: service delivery sectors, health and education In education and health sectors, models were set very early on a national scale. In health sector it is implemented through PPA and carried out by other actors, NGOs. In education sector, the service delivery is fully managed by the state Country-wide programmes: High expectation Limited consultation of the Afghan counterparts in the choice of the strategic orientations: Ownership? Appropriateness? Rationalization process ongoing in MoE and MoPH, it is necessary for: Sustainability of the services, currently highly dependent on external funds, Quality of the services delivered

LRRD: A NEW SET OF STAKEHOLDERS, NEW TRENDS

GoA Afghan NGOs Communities Donors Technical Assistants PRTs Skills / expertise Security / Poppy Political agenda Funds availability Humanitarian space International stakeholders Afghan stakeholders IFIs INGOsUN agencies Private sector

Linking relief, development and… security Main bilateral donors are investing massive amounts of money in the South of the country (Kandahar, Uruzgan, Helmand) Need to ensure a strong commitment to the south What about the buffer zone and the northern part of the country? Cost effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the interventions are difficult to assess (Remote control strategies)  The prerequisite for long-term development in the south in not yet in place. PRTs are playing an increasing role Are PRTs the sole relevant model to work in insecure areas? If, yes what are they doing in the North… Debate on the confusion humanitarian/ military? Relevance, cost effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the interventions are questionable Lack of coherence and coordination with other long-term strategies

Finding the right pace in between building capacities, new roles and responsibilities  The state have defined the main policies (master plan, policies, norms and standards)  Rules are often overlooked Ex: Infrastructure sector (quality, sustainability, cost effectiveness)  Capacities for monitoring and regulations are not yet defined or applied at the field level  Abruptness of change in the transition in between stakeholders’ roles  NGOs: key players in the reconstruction process  NGOs have gathered skills, expertise and in-country experiences  NGOs are a enabling actor to strengthen the private sector’s development (food processing entr.)  Addressing vulnerabilities / Developing the Private sector should come along Sharing responsibilities for building development

ISSUES AT STAKE

Issues at stake Equity – balanced development Civil society and democracy Long term peace Crisis-response capacities in the development agenda