Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Ne us Approaches
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Mapping Good Practice
in the Implementation of
Humanitarian-Development-
Peace Ne us Approaches
Synthesis Report
Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Results Group 4 September 2021
SYNTHESIS REPORT
This report provides a summary of the initiative Mapping good practice in the implementation of
humanitarian-development-peace (HDP) nexus approaches carried out by IASC Results Group 4.
It reflects findings across 16 countries, with individual country reports available on the IASC website.
INTRODUCTION WHAT’S INSIDE
► Operationalizing the Nexus 3
To reduce need, risk and vulnerability, increasing
► Spotlight on Peace, Gender
numbers of countries are implementing the nexus
and Local Actors 6
approach. This has led to a growing and diverse
► Areas for Further IASC Support 10
experience in its operationalization, lessons
learned and good practice. In response to demand
by IASC members, Member States and donors
for operational examples, good practice and
lessons learned, Results Group 4 embarked on a
mapping exercise in 2021. The aim was to provide
a global overview of where and how HDP nexus The mapping also covers the thematic areas of
approaches are implemented, and gather good peace, gender and local actors. These themes
practice and lessons learned. were selected as they are intrinsically linked to
the HDP nexus and require attention in its imple-
The mapping is based on the nexus definition mentation.
adopted in the IASC Light Guidance on Collec-
tive Outcomes. The guidance describes the HDP The mapping was conducted by a subgroup of
nexus as a collective effort by humanitarian, Results Group 4, convened by OCHA in collabo-
development and, where relevant and appropriate, ration with DCO, FAO, ICVA, IOM, Oxfam, PBSO,
peace actors to reduce people’s humanitarian UNDP, UNFPA, WFP, WVI and the Global Protection
needs, risks and vulnerabilities by working towards Cluster. The subgroup developed the concept and
‘collective outcomes’ or HDP priority areas agreed on a set of survey questions and countries.
as follows:
The mapping covers Afghanistan, Burkina Faso,
► Joint analysis or sharing of analyses Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic
to obtain a shared understanding (CAR), Colombia, Democratic Republic of the
of need, risk and vulnerability. Congo (DRC), Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya,
► Articulation of ‘collective outcomes’ or occupied Palestinian territory (oPt), Somalia,
HDP priority areas based on the areas of Sudan and Ukraine.
greatest need, risk and vulnerability.
Resident Coordinators/Humanitarian Coordina-
► Joined-up planning and program-
tors (RC/HCs) in these countries were asked to
ming in support of these collective
consult with key stakeholders and describe the
outcomes or priorities.
overall HDP nexus approach; collective outcomes
► Financing that is aligned or harmonized around or other HDP priority areas; and how they engaged
these collective outcomes or priorities. in joined-up planning, programming and financing
The mapping follows these operational steps around these priorities. They were also asked how
as the key components that have been defined peace, gender and local actors featured in the
to constitute the HDP nexus. While the mapping HDP nexus approach.
captures the progress made in implementing
The below sections summarize the key findings
collective outcomes, it is not exclusive of other
based on analysis across the 16 individual country
approaches that have been developed and imple-
reports, outlining areas where progress has been
mented at the country level.
made, as well as challenges and gaps that require
further support.
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 2
OPERATIONALIZING THE NEXUS
Despite global guidance on the HDP nexus, more on HDP priorities in all countries. Many countries
needs to be done to create a common under- used the new Common Country Analysis (CCA)
standing of the nexus at the country level. The and United Nations Sustainable Development
global community has invested in developing Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) processes as
nexus guidance based on lessons learned as an opportunity to define common HDP priorities,
well as providing training and support to RC/ while drawing on the analysis of the Humanitarian
HCs, UNCTs and HCTs, including through joint Needs Overviews and ensuring complementarity
support missions (the IASC, the JSC and the with Humanitarian Response Plans (HRPs).
OECD-DAC). Progress in implementing nexus
approaches at the country level is evident, but Timeline for UNSDCF processes by country
several countries reported challenges in creating
Already Process
a unified understanding of the nexus approach done in starts in
among stakeholders, with diverging views and Country 2021 2022
interpretations. More work is required to famil-
Afghanistan
iarize stakeholders with guidance documents, in
Burkina Faso
combination with continued, unified support and
incentives from headquarters and donors for Burundi
collective approaches. Cameroon
Strong multi-stakeholder engagement is Central African Republic
needed to support progress across the HDP Chad
nexus. Country-level efforts to implement nexus Colombia
approaches are becoming increasingly collective.
DR of the Congo
In many countries, nexus working groups and
task forces include national and local authorities; Haiti
UN entities; national and international NGOs; the Iraq
World Bank; and bilateral donors. Good practice Jordan
in working with national and local authorities
Lebanon
and civil society range from a High-Level Triple
Nexus Steering Committee endorsed by the Prime Libya
Minister in Somalia, to the participation of national occupied Palestinian territory
NGOs in the HCT in Haiti and the establishment of
Somalia
local-level coordination mechanisms in Colombia.
Sudan
Bilateral donors are increasingly engaged through
nexus working groups and task forces. In some Ukraine
countries, such as Burkina Faso, DRC and Haiti,
individual donors have played a lead role or Collective outcomes are increasingly used to
“championed” the nexus approach. support progress on reducing needs, risks and
vulnerability. In 10 of the 16 countries, collective
Strong advances were made in leadership, outcomes were either already used or planned
sharing of analysis, common priority setting for the upcoming planning cycle to strategically
(collective outcomes) and joined-up planning. RC/ guide interventions through collaboration between
HCs have taken up a leadership role in initiating, humanitarian, development and peace actors. In
coordinating and facilitating nexus approaches. Somalia, the strategic objectives set out in the
Country teams have strengthened the sharing of HRP are aligned with those of the UNSDCF and
analysis and engaged in more joined-up planning both plans reflect the agreed collective outcomes.
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 3
In Haiti and Ukraine, where collective outcomes contribute to HDP priorities (rather than based
have not yet been identified, the HRP contains a on the interests and priorities of individual
specific strategic objective on humanitarian-de- donors). In Burkina Faso, donors have been
velopment collaboration. Collective outcomes involved in identifying HDP priorities, and they
are not a prerequisite for an HDP nexus approach, are increasingly financing initiatives in line with
and the mapping highlights other effective nexus these priorities in areas such as WASH, food
approaches, such as in CAR, where dedicated assistance, social protection and peacebuilding.
working groups are ensuring progress on HDP While several countries reported a lack of compat-
priorities at the subnational level. ibility of existing financing instruments, others
have developed dedicated funds (Cameroon)
Collective Outcomes as of 2021 or financing agreements (Jordan) to support
programming across the HDP nexus. The Ukraine
Completed In progress No collective Humanitarian Fund 2020 standard allocation to
or planned outcomes
0 20 40 60 80 100
Government-controlled areas required all project
0 20 40 60 80 100
proposals to contain a nexus component. Finally,
25% 38% 37% some countries, such as Afghanistan and CAR,
Burkina Faso Burundi Afghanistan have made social protection a major focus of the
Cameroon Central African Rep. Colombia
DR of the Haiti Iraq nexus approach.
Congo Libya Jordan
Somalia oPt Lebanon
Ukraine Sudan
Many countries have highlighted an urgent need
for dedicated nexus adviser capacity to coordi-
nate the HDP nexus approach around analysis,
There is still a need for strengthened alignment planning and programming across the HDP
of programmes and projects towards HDP prior- nexus. Most countries have highlighted that the
ities or collective outcomes. The mapping shows Resident Coordinator’s Office (RCO) could benefit
that challenges remain in moving from nation- from dedicated nexus adviser capacity. Countries
al-level coordination and planning around the highlighted the need for a person who supports
nexus to designing programme-level activities at the RC in (i) convening, facilitating and coordi-
the subnational level. Ensuring complementarity nating the nexus approach around analysis; (ii)
of humanitarian, development and peacebuilding setting HDP priorities; (iii) supporting joined-up
programmes towards common priorities does planning and programming with partners; and
not require joint programming or financing. In (iv) ensuring inclusion of Government, donors,
Cameroon, the early identification of “convergence NGOs and local actors in HDP priority setting and
zones” or geographic focus areas has helped planning. Currently, there are very few dedicated
ensure strengthened programming towards nexus adviser positions, and often they are made
collective outcomes, thus increasing the impact possible only through support from donors, such
on communities. In DRC, mainstreaming collec- as Sweden and the UK in DRC and Switzerland
tive outcomes into provincial development plans, in Haiti, or through the UN-World Bank Humani-
combined with multi-stakeholder workshops in tarian-Development-Peace Partnership Facility
the most vulnerable provinces, aims to bridge in Cameroon.
the gap between national-level planning and
programme implementation. In Ukraine, the HDP
nexus approach is driven at the local level by the
UN, NGOs and local authorities through project
activities supported by national-level strategic
consultations.
There is also a need for more targeted funding
and financing of programmes and projects that
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 4
Progress in operationalizing the HDP nexus
Number of countries by area of work
Completed/ In progress/ Gap/
progressing requiring challenge
well support
Joint
analysis
Collective
outcomes
Planning and
programming
Financing
The table above indicates progress in implementing the HDP nexus
approach in the areas of joint analysis, collective outcomes, joined-up
planning and programming, and financing in each country. This is meant
to guide the selection of country briefs, rather than provide a ranking or
comparison between countries. The information was extracted from
individual country reports.
Photo: OCHA/Charlotte Cans
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 5SPOTLIGHT ON PEACE,
GENDER AND LOCAL ACTORS
A few countries have articulated peace-related
SPOTLIGHT ON collective outcomes. While collective outcomes
are not a prerequisite for an HDP nexus approach,
PEACE those countries offered good practice in making
peace an equal part of the HDP nexus while
Efforts to operationalize a full triple nexus that preserving humanitarian space. In Burkina Faso,
includes peace are at an early stage. Some a collective outcome aims to reduce conflict risk,
progress has been made in involving peace actors while Cameroon’s collective outcome includes
in coordination and strengthening the inclu- an objective on protection, social cohesion and
sion of conflict prevention and peacebuilding in local governance. Albeit not collective outcomes,
analysis, planning and programming. However, Colombia has prioritized victims of armed
these efforts are limited to a few countries. The violence under the HRP and the “peace” objec-
mapping features several contexts with UN multi- tive of the UNSDCF, while Iraq has made social
dimensional peacekeeping or political missions cohesion a priority objective under its durable
(Afghanistan, CAR, DRC, Haiti, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, solutions framework.
oPt, Somalia and Sudan) and some other conflict
In mission settings, efforts were made to ensure
or post-conflict contexts where peace is a key
complementarity of integrated mission planning
component of the nexus approach (Colombia and
with humanitarian and development planning. In
Ukraine). Some countries noted that the sudden
Sudan, collaboration between the United Nations
outbreak of conflict (Libya) or a continuously
Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in
fragile security situation (CAR) posed challenges
Sudan (UNITAMS) and the UNCT ensured that
to the implementation of an HDP nexus approach,
peace issues featured prominently in the nexus
highlighting the importance of interventions
approach, which will be further refined throughout
aimed at strengthening State authority and
the country’s CCA process. In non-mission
public-service delivery alongside social cohesion
settings, where there may not be a dedicated
and peacebuilding. Other countries reported
peace-related planning document, efforts were
that multi-stakeholder analysis and coordination
made to ensure that activities under the HRP and
contributed to building trust and facilitated access
UNSDCF were conflict sensitive and designed to
and assistance or programme delivery, therefore
have a positive impact on social cohesion, conflict
enhancing the HDP nexus approach.
prevention and peacebuilding. In Lebanon, UN and
All countries participating in the mapping non-UN peace and security actors were involved
included peace in their joint analysis or sharing in the UNSDCF planning process. In DRC, the
of data, either as part of the CCA process or United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission
through a dedicated conflict analysis, as a basis in the DR Congo developed a Stabilization and
for an HDP nexus approach. This is important Peacebuilding Marker, a self-rating tool to guide
for ensuring that planning and programming are agencies and donors in implementing activities in
informed by a nuanced understanding of the and on conflict.
context. In Iraq, regular conflict analysis and
Many countries mentioned the Peacebuilding
guidance by a social cohesion and peacebuilding
Fund (PBF) as making a critical contribution to
subgroup guide the implementation of area-based
the implementation of the HDP nexus. In CAR, the
action plans for durable solutions.
PBF supports the implementation and sustaining
of the peace agreement between the Govern-
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 6ment and 14 armed groups, making an important
contribution to restoring State authority and basic SPOTLIGHT ON
services, which is vital for the implementation
of the HDP nexus approach. In DRC, projects
GENDER
under the PBF were designed on the basis of
joint analysis and collective prioritization, and In most countries, a gender lens has been applied
they contribute to transitional justice, dialogue to data collection and analysis, planning and
and peaceful coexistence in the three HDP programming to ensure gender sensitivity and
nexus focus provinces (Kasai, Kasai Central and responsiveness. For example, the assessment of
Tanganyika). In Sudan, the PBF supports the re-es- the socioeconomic impact of COVID-19 in CAR
tablishment of basic services, strengthening rule provides clear gender-disaggregated data relevant
of law and reducing local conflicts to encourage for the nexus approach, whereas the 2021 Ukraine
durable solutions for displaced persons. HRP had a Gender and Age Marker score of at
least 4. Libya’s Joint Country Assessment also
Several countries cite continued risk aversion includes a dedicated gender analysis, and Afghan-
by bilateral donors and the World Bank as a istan issued a Gender in Conflict Analysis; both
challenge towards more sustainable program- addressed gender not merely as a cross-cutting
ming in volatile contexts. Donors seem to issue but as an issue considered vital for imple-
acknowledge the need to support longer-term menting the overall nexus approach. DRC has a
programming to test innovative approaches, but dedicated collective outcome to reduce gender- 15.7M
at the same time they require detailed predictions, based violence (GBV).
which sometimes cannot be made in a volatile
environment. Facilitating inclusive local ownership by women’s
groups is showcased in several countries. In
Burundi, networks of female human rights
Peacebuilding Fund by country
defenders and local women NGOs are being
DRC $13.94M consulted and involved in the implementation
of the nexus approach at national and provincial
Burkina $11.14M levels. In Jordan, the nexus approach is charac-
Faso
terized by Government-led initiatives, where an
Haiti $10.04M Inter-Ministerial Committee was established to
provide leadership, coordination and account-
CAR $9.98M
ability for Government action on achieving
Sudan $6.8M women’s rights commitments. The committee
liaises with the different levels of Government and
Colombia $4.6M civil-society organizations (CSOs) on actions to
be taken towards gender equality. In Colombia,
Cameroon $3.64M
dedicated gender working groups at national
Ukraine $2M and field levels provide guidance on gender
mainstreaming.
Somalia $0.66M
Joint efforts between UN and non-UN partners
Source: PBF, April 2021. Please note that this is not a complete pave the way for gender in the implementation
overview of PBF allocations in 2020 but only shows the allocations of nexus approaches. In CAR, a joint UN-EU-AU
for the countries covered by the mapping.
analysis of the peace process from a gender
perspective was conducted as part of the CCA.
In Lebanon, a joint programme supports the
country on its Women, Peace and Security agenda.
In oPt, efforts were made to ensure that joint
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 7analysis and programming around the nexus approach is including a strategic objective in the
are fully gender sensitive. In Sudan, dedicated HRP to strengthen national and regional Govern-
gender resources in the Special Representative’s ment ownership and local responders’ capacity
Office (SRO) and the RCO supported the inclu- as part of a humanitarian exit strategy in Govern-
sion of gender issues into analysis, planning and ment-controlled areas from 2021-2023.
programming.
Government buy-in and leadership are critical
GenCap support has featured in several countries to an effective and sustainable HDP nexus
through the deployment of GenCap advisers and approach. In many countries, there was strong
consultants as dedicated gender resources to engagement of national and local authorities. In
implement nexus approaches. In Burkina Faso most countries, ministries are co-chairing or at
and CAR, they supported the development of a least participating in HDP working groups or
gender road map and a comprehensive gender task forces, including the ministries of human-
analysis and strategy for coordinated action itarian aid; ministries of the economy, planning
across the nexus. In Somalia, GenCap collabo- and cooperation; offices of the prime minister; or
rated on a multi-sectoral rapid gender assessment ministries of water. Local government and munic-
for identifying current gender-equality issues, ipalities were involved, particularly in countries
perceptions and participation barriers among where the HDP nexus approach is focused on
women’s camp committees in IDP sites and UN “convergence zones” or area-based programming,
Women community structures. Sudan reported often in the context of protracted displacement
the importance of dedicated gender resources in and durable solutions. In Cameroon, the HDP
country, illustrating their advisers in the SRO and Nexus Task Force convenes all relevant stake-
the RCO, who supported the inclusion of gender holders at the national level, mirrored by regional
issues into analysis, planning and programming. groups in the Far North and Eastern Front.
While the role of local actors is recognized
globally, there is a need to make their key role
and contributions more visible. Some countries
SPOTLIGHT ON reported challenges in bringing local NGOs or
LOCAL ACTORS CSOs into these forums, often due to the sheer
number of such organizations. A good practice
in DRC was the inclusion of national counter-
In the countries that participated in the mapping, parts at local/provincial and central/ministerial
the level of local actors’ involvement varies. In levels from the beginning of the design process
some countries, the HDP nexus is still limited of the collective outcomes in 2019. This inclusive
to international actors, such as the UN, NGOs approach has also been followed for the imple-
and bilateral donors. In other countries, however, mentation of PBF projects in DRC. In Burkina Faso,
coordination with national and local actors and development and peacebuilding interventions are
their involvement at all stages of the process was specifically designed to strengthen the capacities
a strong priority. Countries with solid strategic of regional and local authorities as well as NGOs
plans and effective coordination structures, and community-based organizations, supporting
combined with a bottom-up and people-centred social cohesion. Overall, local NGOs’ participation
approach, such as Colombia, Iraq and Lebanon, in humanitarian coordination mechanisms has
were the most successful in terms of engaging a improved significantly in recent years. In Haiti, the
wide range of local actors and engaging them as HCT’s inclusion of local actors, who often do not
strategic rather than implementing partners. In distinguish between humanitarian and develop-
Colombia and Iraq, local area-based coordination ment activities, has ensured greater inclusion of
teams are the main drivers of HDP nexus imple- local actors in HDP nexus discussions.
mentation. In Ukraine, a key feature of the nexus
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 8Engaging local actors in the nexus approach
has ensured a more people-centred approach
and greater accountability to affected people in
some countries. For example, the UN in Lebanon
is establishing an oversight body to serve as an
independent mechanism for representatives
from civil society and other institutions to provide
broad oversight on the recovery work, and to
help channel people’s perspectives and increase
accountability.
Photo: OCHA/Mouangue
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 9AREAS FOR FURTHER IASC SUPPORT
The HDP nexus approach aims to change the way building nexus capacity, including through the
humanitarian, development and peace actors work Nexus Academy and the deployment of nexus
to deliver real, lasting change for crisis-affected advisers who can support implementation
people by reducing and ultimately ending humani- of the HDP nexus approach in line with the
tarian need. IASC Light Guidance on Collective Outcomes.
All the contexts covered by the mapping have Related to the above, the mapping shows the
good practices and learning to share, and the progress made in joining up analysis and planning
IASC has a key role in promoting this learning and documents in many countries, but it also shows
continuing the push with all stakeholders to make the difficulty in translating global- and nation-
this systems-change happen. al-level commitment into programming and
financing towards commonly agreed priorities at
The mapping shows that over the past few years, the subnational level. This requires implementing
much progress has been made in strengthening organizations and donors to more fully commit
a common understanding of the HDP nexus at to supporting commonly agreed HDP priorities
the global level, which has been translated in over several years, and to adjust their monitoring
a number of connected forums and guidance processes to measure progress against these
documents by the IASC, the UN Sustainable Devel- priorities.
opment Group (UNSDG) and OECD/DAC. This has
resulted in a more diverse and collective group of ► The IASC, in collaboration with the UNSDG
actors at the field level committing to and imple- and OECD/DAC, could initiate further work
menting HDP nexus approaches in support of around monitoring and accountability in the
national and local governments. However, more implementation of HDP nexus approaches.
work is needed to disseminate existing guidance
The mapping generally shows progress in
at the country level.
engaging national and local authorities in HDP
The mapping reveals impressive efforts and nexus approaches. However, there is still some
significant progress in terms of changing the way way to go in further promoting the participation
humanitarian, development and peace actors work and engagement of local NGOs around commonly
together, setting these systems on track to deliver agreed priorities at the subnational level.
better for affected people. The progress made is
► The IASC could support inclusive workshops
a collective effort, but it usually required consider-
with the participation and engagement of
able time and effort by individuals. The consistent
local actors to enhance a common under-
message across all countries covered by the
standing of the HDP nexus, and support
mapping is that while “mainstreaming” capacities
the difficult process of translating nation-
to implement the HDP nexus across organizations
al-level priority-setting and planning
is also required, it is not enough. Dedicated nexus
into activities at the subnational level.
advisers are needed, at least over the next two
to three years, in order to translate the systemic The mapping highlights positive examples of
and institutional shifts into a concerted effort to where peace actors, conflict sensitivity, social
ensure that each activity makes a measurable cohesion and peacebuilding have been important
difference in people’s lives by contributing to parts of the nexus approach without compro-
commonly agreed priorities. mising humanitarian actors’ ability to deliver on
their mandate. In particular, the mapping also
► The IASC should continue collaborating underlines that to achieve HDP priorities, peace-
with the UNSDG and OECD-DAC to support building must be a core part of development
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 10programming and, as such, be coordinated with in making HDP approaches gender sensitive just
other activities under the UNSDCF and those by involving women’s groups as well as gender
under the HRP. expertise in the form of GenCap and others in
coordinating and articulating HDP priorities and
► The ongoing IASC initiative to develop related activities. In some cases, this might lead
a “peace toolkit” will further contribute to to making gender-related issues, such as GBV, a
strengthening the peace component in the dedicated priority for the HDP nexus.
HDP nexus by providing guidance on conflict
analysis, conflict sensitivity and peacebuilding. ► The recently conducted IASC review
on gender in the nexus may shed
The mapping also shows that many countries are
further light on the good practices
taking gender seriously in their implementation
and lessons learned in this regard.
of HDP nexus approaches. Much can be achieved
Photo: UNHCR
Mapping Good Practice in the Implementation of Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Approaches 11You can also read
