A FEINSTEIN INTERNATIONAL CENTER BRIEF
Daniel Maxwell, Elizabeth Stites, Sabina C. Robillard, and Michael Wagner
This report describes a relatively unknown humanitarian program that has addressed one of the saddest aspects of displacement – the separation of families. Between 2004 and 2014, UNHCR’s Confidence Building Measures (CBM) program helped more than 20,000 refugees in the Tindouf desert camps of Algeria to visit their families in Western Sahara, from whom they’d been separated since the conflict in Western Sahara began (late 1970s). The CBM program was brought to a halt by politics, but the report suggests that the time is right for this ‘humanitarian bridge’ to be re-opened.
By Julie Flaherty
Three questions with Gregory Gottlieb, the new director of the Feinstein International Center at Tufts
Forced displacement is among the most pressing challenges in the Middle East North Africa (MENA) region.
The number of people forcibly displaced worldwide continues to increase, particularly in MENA, where waves of unrest and conflict have driven a huge increase in displacement. In 2016, there were an estimated 65.6 million people forcibly displaced around the world, of which 26 percent were living in countries across the MENA region.
For each refugee displaced in MENA, there are almost six internally displaced people (IDPs).
1. A note from the Dean
July 25, 2017
Dear Friends of the Feinstein International Center:
In 2005, the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement / Army concluded a peace agreement, formally ending the 22-year-old civil war. Following a referendum, South Sudan seceded; donors put billions toward the new state and Sudan’s recovery, supporting – among other things – the development of new state institutions for both countries. However, in December 2013, war broke out again in South Sudan.
During conflicts and crises, children often face multiple stressors that can have significant impacts on their physical, cognitive, social and emotional development. Because unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) have lost the care and protection of their primary caregivers, they face a heightened risk of abuse, neglect, exploitation and violence (Maestral International, 2011). As a result, programming for UASC cases is often prioritized in the context of humanitarian interventions (Maestral International, 2011; Hepburn et al., 2004).
Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions (WASH) are commonly implemented as part of emergency response activities (i.e. in response to disease outbreaks) in low and middle-income countries. But what does the existing evidence tell us about what works? How does the use of WASH interventions reduce disease outbreaks? What are the programme design and implementation characteristics associated with more effective programmes? What is the cost effectiveness of WASH interventions in emergency outbreak situations? What are the barriers and facilitators to WASH interventions in outbreaks?
There is growing consensus on the need to consider and support markets as part of humanitarian responses. It is assumed that this support will increase the impact of responses – yet to date such assumptions are rarely supported by data and strong evidence.
This systematic review, commissioned by the Humanitarian Evidence Programme and carried out by a team from the EPPI-Centre, University College London (UCL), draws together primary research on mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programmes for people affected by humanitarian crises in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It investigates both the process of implementing MHPSS programmes and their receipt by affected populations, as well as assessing their intended and unintended effects.
This systematic review, commissioned by the Humanitarian Evidence Programme (HEP) and carried out by a research team from the University of Sheffield, represents the first attempt to apply systematic review methodology to establish the relationships between recovery and relapse and between default rates and repeated episodes of default or relapse in the management of acute malnutrition in children in humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries
The people of the Sudan’s Darfur Region have experienced numerous shocks of various types over the past 15 years. This report describes exactly how shocks have affected specific livelihood groups in Darfur, the extent to which people have been successful at recovering their self-sufficiency, and why. We found that households make calculated decisions based on balancing the potential risks and returns of activities in light of shocks. We found that some key factors influencing resilience and recovery in this context include:
This evidence synthesis, commissioned by the Humanitarian Evidence Programme and carried out by a team from the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department of Tufts University, identifies, synthesizes and evaluates existing evidence of the impacts of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions in disease outbreaks in 51 humanitarian contexts in 19 low and middle-income countries (LMICs).
What are water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions?
Individuals and organizations responding to humanitarian crises recognize the need to improve urban emergency response and preparedness – including the need to devise better methods for assessing vulnerability within urban populations.
Pastoralists rely on coping and adaptation strategies that have historically allowed them to achieve high levels of productivity, manage the hazards and unpredictability of life in the marginal areas that they occupy and moderate the impacts of shocks (Butt et al., 2009; Hesse and Pattison, 2013; Morton, 2006). But despite the unique suitability of these strategies to their livelihoods, the food security of many pastoralist populations – especially in Africa – is increasingly under threat. Crises faced by pastoralists have increased in frequency and intensity in recent decades.
Shelter is critical to the survival of people affected by humanitarian crises as it provides safety and security, protection from the climate and resistance to ill health and disease (The Sphere Project, 2011; Zetter, 2012). Having somewhere safe, secure and healthy to live, with access to livelihood opportunities, healthcare and education is also fundamental to sustaining family and community life during post-crisis recovery and reconstruction or displacement, return and resettlement.
Does the humanitarian system have the capacity and vision to respond effectively to the crises of today, of tomorrow and deep into the future? This report analyses the failings of the system and the resulting widespread malaise in the humanitarian community, based on (1) an in-depth analysis of past crises, and (2) the humanitarian landscape of today and what this tells us of the system’s ability to adapt in order to respond to future, uncertain and potentially much greater challenges.