INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY; SHELTERING URBAN AND NON CAMP BASED REFUGEES IN LEBANON AND JORDAN Shelter Meeting 13B

Majority of refugees are not in camps but residing within private rental arrangements in urban/peri- urban areas (800,000 registered refugees in Lebanon – 15% in ITS. 550,000 in Jordan – <120,000 in Zaatari (?)). However camps are very visible and it is much easier to provide assistance Direct cash rental support can have an inflationary effect on the market  Especially in saturated markets  Impacts on local renters Host communities becoming increasingly frustrated with presence of refugees. WHAT CAN WE DO?

A Market driven philosophy 2 possible ways to address urban support 1.Increase access to credit (inflate the bubble....) or 2.Increase the housing stock Unfinished buildings are very common in Lebanon and Jordan Incremental construction done as people can afford to do so – generally to pass onto children when they marry or as families increase in size. Banks offer loans at usually high levels of interest

The approach (simplified & evolving) ‘Advertise’ a need for unfinished buildings within the local community – owners contact NRC through a hotline. NRC team visits buildings to assess suitability Technical team prepare BoQ Social team (with Legal/ICLA support) prepare contracts and match HH with owner/building Staged conditional payments made to owner to undertake works (Jordan = $2000 & Lebanon = $1500) Families allowed to stay rent free for 12 (L) or 18 (J) months

“Its too expensive” Lebanon (costs are approximate) Annual costs per Household in a collective centre = $3000 Shelter = $250, + Latrine = $350, + WASH infrastructure, + winterisation, + rents paid by refugees, +++ Jordan Tent/storage/handling/kitchen = $< WASH + infrastructure Shelter = >$ WASH + infrastructure E.G roads in Azrak have cost $12 million – or $240 pp assuming 50k population

The benefits include Incentivisation of host communities – provides a clear benefit to hosting refugees without inflating the rental market Conditions generally better Potentially less health/protection issues ‘Sustainable’ fund usage – investment remains unlike Facilitates relationship management between the communities – Jordanian authorities assist with reference checks of landlords Can increase longer term availability of housing stock for the local rental market

Complications include Very difficult to scale up - systems limitations;  6000 HH (L) 4500 HH (J) (target for 2014 =7500 HH)  Time demands  Ideally need significant follow up capacity  Efficient way of making payments is key Completed buildings could potentially attract greater rents in the private sector Rogue landlords – increasing rents or pulling out before hosting starts. Do we take them to court? Only applicable in areas where large stock of unfinished buildings!

Incentivisation of host communities – a way forward? Happy host communities = easier assistance environment Inherent value/costs of hosting need to be better appreciated by the humanitarian community. Understanding of local rental laws allows contracts to become the risk management tool to facilitate decision making around investment. Preventing eviction a potential programme in itself. Repairs and upgrades the possible next step? Investment with ‘multipliers’ – energy related support (solar heaters/insulation etc) could increase ‘payback’ for owners

Questions?