This chapter focuses on the after phase of an emergency. The term “after” does not imply that the crisis is over, but rather indicates the medium- to longer-term priorities of individuals and communities, once immediate humanitarian needs are met. Interventions in this phase aim to mitigate the impacts of displacement, particularly protracted displacement situations, and/or to support the transition towards recovery and development.

As such, this chapter covers the progressive resolution of displacement situations, as well as some essentials of stabilization, peacebuilding, reparations and transitional justice, and housing, land and property restitution. As explained in the Introduction, crisis response is not sequential. Interventions linked to addressing protracted displacement, solutions and recovery should start early, with planning beginning during emergency responses and responses often overlapping with humanitarian contexts (see Emergency Response). They also have a role to play in preventing the recurrence of a crisis, and/or preparing for or reducing the risk of future disasters (see Prevention, preparedness and reducing risks).

Humanitarian–development–peace nexus

Humanitarian aid is designed to save lives and alleviate suffering during and in the immediate aftermath of emergencies. It focuses largely on the individual, aiming to meet needs and reduce vulnerabilities. It is not intended to tackle the structural and contextual dynamics that can contribute to instability. Nor is it intended to be sustained over the medium and long term in situations of protracted crisis. Development aid, in contrast, supports structures and systems that advance economic, institutional and social development, builds capacity for resilient communities and sustainable livelihoods, and tends to target areas where interventions will benefit the greatest number of people. Different forms of aid often have both humanitarian and development components.

The different working principles, mandates, values and assumptions of humanitarian and development actors pose fundamental challenges that both fields struggle to overcome in crisis and post-crisis contexts. On the one hand, the independence of the two fields is necessary. Given that development aid is primarily delivered through governments, there is a risk that humanitarian aid will be politicized if it is aligned with political and development goals [International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), 2018]. Humanitarian assistance must be rapid, flexible, agile and risk tolerant, which development aid—which is inherently risk averse—is unable to accommodate.

Image / Video

Source

IOM/Eunjin Jeong, 2015.

On the other hand, there is a clear intersecting relationship between the two fields. Where development is strong, States, communities and populations are better able to prepare for and withstand the impacts of crisis and have the structures and systems in place to respond to and recover from emergencies. In turn, crises disproportionately affect fragile contexts or areas where development is weak. In such contexts, humanitarian assistance can end up taking on chronic problems that extend beyond the short-term intent of humanitarian relief. Development-oriented approaches can help minimize aid dependency. During a crisis, longer-term planning for protracted situations, as well as transition and recovery measures should be put in place. Protracted situations and post-crisis contexts require long-term multi-year development-oriented financing while also requiring the speed, flexibility and risk tolerance of humanitarian assistance.

Recent efforts to improve the complementarity of humanitarian and development actions are usually referred to as the “humanitarian­–development nexus” (HDN). Many actors increasingly point to the interdependency of “peace” within this nexus, thus referring to the “humanitarian–development–peace nexus” (HDPN). This brings in peacebuilding, security and stability activities that are relevant and appropriate to the nexus.

Policy Approaches
Implementing the humanitarian–development–peace nexus

Joint approaches

  • Apply joint assessments, analysis, planning, programming and financing towards collective outcomes that cut across the humanitarian, recovery, peace and development phases of a crisis.
  • Recognize the interdependence and mutually reinforcing impact of the nexus.
  • The collective outcomes should lead towards commonly agreed measurable results or impacts in reducing people’s needs, risks and vulnerabilities and increasing their resilience.
  • Draw on the combined efforts of different actors.

Multi-year approach

  • Analysis, strategic planning and financing operations should build over several years to achieve context-specific and, at times, dynamic targets.
  • Plans should take account of the needs, risks and vulnerabilities of various populations.
  • Plans should also aim to reduce those needs, risks and vulnerabilities, in line with the 2030 Agenda.

Capacity building

  • Reinforce (rather than replace) existing national and local capacities to enhance resilience.

Comparative advantages

  • Make the best use of the unique, demonstrated capacity and expertise (not limited solely to a mandate) of one individual, group or institution.
  • Contribute to risk and vulnerability reduction, over the capacity of another actor.
Mitigating protracted displacement

In protracted contexts, the lines between humanitarian response and recovery are particularly blurred. The longer the displacement continues, the more difficult it is to resolve (World Bank, 2021). Populations also risk being locked into a cycle of crisis or situations of acute vulnerability and dependence on external assistance. Together with meeting the humanitarian needs of displaced persons, then, there is a need to pursue alternatives to aid dependency, supporting host communities and laying the foundation for solutions and recovery. Activities should focus on building resilience to renewed destabilizing factors, restoring peace and security as well as meeting other infrastructural or economic needs that enable the transition towards longer-term recovery. Displacement is often seen as a temporary phenomenon. However, policymakers should consider the likelihood of displacement becoming protracted.

Local governments have the primary responsibility for providing, among other things, services, security, safety, justice and public infrastructure to the populations they serve. Large-scale population influxes can stretch local budgets and overwhelm local systems and services. Such influxes can also contribute to competition for jobs and resources, tension over land and property, inflation and changes in the socioeconomic or demographic profile of the community. And each of these can give rise to new problems, or inflame pre-existing ones. Population influxes can rapidly distort housing markets and dramatically increase rents as a result of growth in demand. Displaced populations often lack security of tenure and live in fear of evictions. Opportunities for land or home ownership are usually reliant on documentation and potentially personal networks that IDPs may lack, with discrimination an additional barrier in many cases. Women may be particularly disadvantaged in attempts to gain access to land tenure by law and tradition.

The transition towards durable solutions often involves incremental steps undertaken—sequentially or simultaneously—at the individual, community and systemic levels (IOM, 2016a). With humanitarian assistance assuring that the immediate needs of displaced people are met, community stabilization, peacebuilding and development-oriented programming aim to build the resilience, self-reliance, stability and socioeconomic well-being of the IDPs and the hosting communities.

Table
Table 1. Key considerations in mitigating protracted displacement
SELF-RELIANCE
  • Enable access to local labour markets and services to reduce dependency on humanitarian aid.
  • Seek out opportunities to develop local economies and markets and capitalize on newly available labour resources and increased demand.
ACCESS TO SERVICES
  • Invest in existing government structures and systems to help them cope with large population influxes, facilitate adequate and equitable access to basic services and help address discrepancies in the availability and quality of services, including water, sanitation and hygiene, health and housing.
HOUSING, LAND AND PROPERTY
  • Facilitate displaced people in retrieving or receiving adequate documentation to support their claims on housing, land and property. Put measures in place that help to regulate housing markets and, for displaced persons, to secure adequate and sustainable accommodation.

 

Community stabilization

Community stabilization initiatives help to reinforce the systems and services necessary for societies and communities to function, while also promoting community-level social cohesion, livelihoods, and peaceful and inclusive societies. Such programmes can benefit both displaced populations and community members, whether directly or indirectly. Activities could include restoring or augmenting services, establishing spaces for civic dialogue, providing social housing, engaging in income generating activities or other activities that catalyse economies. Importantly, stabilization approaches look for the additional gains that can be achieved from an intended output. For instance, if a local health clinic requires rehabilitation, in addition to ensuring its repair, a stabilization approach would further identify and promote additional dividends in terms of community consultations, social cohesion, public works or cash-for-work, and the like.

Core principles of a stabilization approach:

  • Government partnership and leadership
  • Context specific
  • Community owned and community driven
  • Flexible and adaptable
  • Multisectoral and integrated
  • Catalytic
  • Involving strategic communication
  • Conflict-sensitive approach

Neither specifically humanitarian nor developmental, stabilization programmes have strong connections with both fields and are closely interlinked with resilience building as well as with peacebuilding. They can be implemented concurrently and incorporated into humanitarian or development interventions. Stabilization approaches focus on a broader array of stakeholders. They are adaptive, flexible and rapid interventions in the manner of humanitarian assistance but are aimed towards elevating a community to a point where they can eventually transition to and benefit from development programmes or be self-reliant.

Good Practice
Community revitalization in Iraq

Through the Community Revitalization Programme (CRP), the Iraqi Government with IOM support empowered local communities to take the lead in their own development and contributed to stabilization by improving the conditions for the sustainable economic and social inclusion of vulnerable communities with significant populations of IDPs and returnees. Major activities included:

  • Rehabilitation of essential public services and infrastructure in line with the priorities of communities and their local and provincial authorities;
  • Supporting local economies by revitalizing small-scale industries and promoting new sectors that respond to market opportunities;
  • Enhancing human capital; for example, capacity-building among vulnerable community members through providing technical training, which enhances vocational skills and raises awareness of local job market opportunities;
  • Supporting civic engagement and the development of strong governance structures;
  • Strengthening community-led reconciliation efforts which address the rights and needs of communities through an inclusive process.
Source

IOM Iraq Mission, n.d.

Development-oriented programming that supports education, skill acquisition and livelihoods, and that aims to reinforce the agency and capacities of affected populations, helps to mitigate dependency on humanitarian aid and to promote self-reliance in the long term. Beyond improving individual well-being during displacement and the individual’s contribution to the surrounding community, it builds resilience that will benefit and improve the potential sustainability of the solution.

Hosting large, displaced communities can be challenging. However, with adequate contextual analysis, thoughtful planning and management there are also potential gains and opportunities. Host communities may benefit from assistance programmes that include vulnerable community members or that have community-wide impacts, or from migrant remittances including support to families, businesses or wider communities. New populations can also increase demand for goods and services which can stimulate local markets, and they may introduce new skills and expand the labour force. In countries with high numbers of people living in protracted displacement, focusing on helping them rebuild their lives and contribute to their host communities will allow progress toward many of the global Sustainable Development Goals (IDMC, 2017). Understanding the positive contributions of migration and mobility can help identify interventions that can be transformative for the community as a whole.

Policy Approaches
Supporting improvements to stability and building resilience
  • Investing early and building on positive changes as a catalyst for longer term recovery.
  • Applying an integrated approach, for instance by linking community engagement with improvements to basic infrastructure, livelihoods or security.
  • Fostering environments conducive to the realization of rights, mitigating dependency on humanitarian aid and promoting self-reliance in the long term.
  • Seeing target groups as predominantly people with capacities rather than people with needs.
  • Engaging with communities by bringing groups together to define and drive their own recovery processes.
  • Ensuring that the specific experiences and concerns of different groups are solicited, considered and addressed. Such groups might be distinguished by gender, age, ethnicity, religion, ability or other characteristics.
  • Promoting transparent and inclusive engagement and participation through an area-based approach. This is defined as an area, rather than a sector or target group (such as displaced person, returnee or host community member) as the primary entry point.
  • Establishing effective coordination mechanisms, either integrated with or to complement those focused on humanitarian response or development assistance.
  • Stabilization interventions should be based on localized (stability) assessments, and should be flexible, to adapt to new opportunities or emergent destabilizing factors.
Good Practice
Midnimo Unity project in Somalia

In response to protracted displacement in urban centres resulting from three decades of civil conflict, new cases of drought-related displacement and the return of refugees from Kenya, Midnimo project was developed as a Government-led, community-driven initiative, focused on establishing foundations for peaceful coexistence and stability as a foundation for long-term recovery. The project aimed to:

  1. Support local government administrations to be responsive to the needs of communities in areas highly impacted by displacement and returns;
  2. Establish peaceful foundations for recovery through intercommunal and intracommunal dialogue, joint planning and community-driven projects;
  3. Support planned urban expansion and settlement upgrading in urban environments and their surroundings that were experiencing an influx of IDPs.

Midnimo project also played an enabling role in the creation of a policy and legal framework conducive to long-term recovery and to the integration of other programmes related to job creation, rule of law and governance. In addition to the practical outputs of the project, as defined by the communities, Midnimo also supported the creation of civic spaces for recreation, sports, arts and culture. This component was considered key in restoring social cohesion and forging a common vision of “unity” community wide.

Midnimo project was also integrated into programmes aimed at addressing humanitarian needs, such as those supported by the Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) Cluster. For example, CCCM efforts to improve the management of displacement sites and coordinate humanitarian response is now aligned with Government-endorsed plans and policies for planned urban expansion, supported through Midnimo.

Source

IOM, 2018.

Key messages
  • In protracted displacement situations, it is important to meet the humanitarian needs of displaced persons while, at the same time, pursuing alternatives to aid dependency, supporting host communities, and laying the foundation for solutions and recovery.
  • Community stabilization approaches are adaptive, flexible and rapid interventions in the manner of humanitarian assistance but are aimed towards elevating a community to a point where they can eventually transition to and benefit from development programmes or be self-reliant.
PreviousInternational instruments, initiatives and dialoguesNextSolutions for displacement