SESSION 1A: Introduction and Definition of Social CohesionLed by: Ann Ward (UNDP) & Jos de la Haye (UNDP Regional)

Objectives Present an overview of the purpose and objectives of the workshop Form a working definition, through interaction with participants, of social

cohesion Summary Jos: Introduction to social cohesion

What defines social cohesion? What comes up in your mind when you think of it?

o Togethernesso Integration amongst different communitieso Positive engagemento High level of trusto Decreasing tensionso Peacefulo Interdependenceo Social solidarityo Cooperationo Conditions that also make social cohesion more likely to happeno Acceptance of cultural beliefs, differences

Do you like social cohesion? Do others find social cohesion to be ideal? o Not in all contextso The concept of social cohesion is a bit fluffy and unclearo Social cohesion is a pursuit, not an end: the process in itself can be

rehabilitativeo Sensitivity of social cohesion: willingness to engage in social cohesion

makes one vulnerableo Social cohesion is a necessary element of peace o In no sense a destination, but there can be processes of social

cohesion The issue is to understand in the Arab states the regional interpretation of social

cohesion Social fabric: restore relationships of cooperation Jos’s elements of social cohesion:

o Belongingo Participation o Conditions conducive to social cohesion?

Equal opportunities

EMERGENCY LIVELIHOODS & SOCIAL COHESION

Cluster Workshop Canyon Hotel – August 6, 2015

Legitimacy Recognition of diversity

o Does social cohesion require social acclimatization? The disappearance of divisive identities?

Example of Syrian refugees taking on new identities, example of good social cohesion

But is this necessarily the path that we want? How profound are feelings of belonging and participation when

these identities begin blending in? Ann: what is the personal interpretation of social cohesion? What are your

personal perceptions of social cohesion? o Goal: create a definition that fits Iraq and Kurdistan

Action points (if any)

Continue thinking about your definition of social cohesion and how it fits in the emergency context of Iraq

Any suggestions should be aired at the next Emergency Livelihoods & Social Cohesion cluster meeting

SESSION 1B: Social Cohesion Risk AnalysisLed by: Andrew Ma (UNDP)

Objectives Summarize the findings from UNDP’s most recent social cohesion analysis, synthesizing three assessments: Host Community Impact Assessment, Host Community Needs Assessment, and the Conflict Risk Analysis

Summary Increasing need to identify an evidence base for social cohesion UNDP recently conducted three assessments to form a social cohesion

analysis linking livelihoods / socioeconomic determinants of social cohesion These assessments are aligned along the cluster’s conceptualization of social

cohesiono IDPs cause an impact upon Kurdish host communities (HCIA)o These impacts are perceived negatively (HCNA)o Areas that have certain demographic and socioeconomic factors are

prone to conflict risks (Conflict Risk Analysis) Key findings are below

HCIA KEY FINDINGS Many assumptions of the economic impact of IDPs on host communities are false In some hosting areas, prices have dropped due to an increased unskilled labor supply In regards to wages, IDPs have had mixed effects upon local host community individuals:

o unskilled, informal, lower-level workers have endured drops in wage due to IDPs, o professional, educated, and formally employed enjoy significant increases in wages

IDPs in the KRI contribute about $2.6 billion in economic transactions per month in the KRI The overall impact of IDPs on host community unemployment is miniscule However: the specific effect on workers in the urban informal sector are significant, since

they are the most exposed to increased labor competition by IDPs. Women are also much more vulnerable to the economic impacts of IDPs than are men, and

female heads of households are significantly more willing to take short-term or under-paying employing in order to cope with these impacts.

The presence of IDPs generates significant localized economic activity, labor force participation and numbers employed in firms is increased.

HCNA KEY FINDINGS Perceptions of host communities need to be considered by Humanitarian Agencies in order

to ensure that ‘Do No Harm’ principles are maintained. Poor perceptions of IDPs on behalf of host communities can be distinctly tied to

socioeconomic or demographic factors High unemployment and problems in identifying employment are strongly correlated with

host community’s negative perceptions of IDPs, especially when barriers to employment include lack of connections and increased competition

Host communities that experience poor service provision from the government are also much more likely to view IDPs negatively, and overwhelmingly point to IDPs as the cause of deteriorating services due to increased demand

Communities that are vulnerable (i.e. have a high proportion of residents who rely upon the government for basic needs) have been shown to be much more hostile towards IDPs

Findings show that livelihoods support has not been systematically targeted to any specific livelihood criteria, including livelihood type, economic vulnerability, nor the ability to afford basic needs, possibly causing harm in communities in which resources are inequitably distributed.

Conflict Risk Analysis KEY FINDINGSCertain distinct demographic and socioeconomic factors are linked to the likelihood of social or ethnic conflict The demographic percentage, of diverse socio-religious groups – such as Sunni and Shi’a –

is a strong predictor of social tensions and ethnic violence. The more equal the percentage, the greater the risk of tension. In communities which are tribally homogenous, social violence is 56% less likely to occur. The demographic percentage has changed due to recent displacement which has caused

many communities to become more demographically balanced and therefore more at risk. Social tensions and conflict are much more likely to occur in urban areas, particularly those in

which pressure on public resources is high. Observed social violence is not particularly linked to employment rates or income except if

there is a concentration of an unemployed lower middle class (the majority of whom are youth 15-25)

Finally, most ethnically-targeted crimes and incidents of social violence are caused by youth between the ages of 15 and 25.

UNDP has thus mapped these factors as a preliminary overview of social tension risk, and this map is able to be distributed to cluster partners and those working within social cohesion

There is a distinct need for regularly updated data to develop a social tensions Early Warning System to track and prioritize the areas that need immediate social cohesion management / livelihoods assistance

Action points (if any)

Develop, after consultation with partners within and outside the clusters, an early warning system using these relationships

Begin integrating the tension monitoring / incidents report into the early warning system

Create a more robust evidence base for social cohesion / livelihoods programmers inside and outside the cluster

SESSION 1C: IOM’s Approach to Community StabilizationLed by: Ashley Carl (IOM)

Objectives Present a cluster partner approach to community stabilization, emergency livelihoods, and social cohesion

Summary Emergency Livelihoods presentation (Ash) o How would you define livelihoods in the emergency context in Iraq? o Duhok: take the various inputs (external aid, employment income) and

other income to form a lifeo Stabilization and restoration o Mechanism for income generation, and improved coping mechanismso Quick and responsive to the emergency contexto Minimum life insurance

Community stabilization approach of IOMo Two approaches:

Bottom-up: working with vulnerable communities to identify gaps in social services, basic infrastructure, security, social cohesion, and economic opportunities

Top-down: working with government authorities and provide support to develop appropriate operational systems

o Social Cohesion & Sustainable livelihoods: Supporting displaced population self-reliance Increasing employability and reducing psychological stress and

frustration Four components of the strategy

o Enhancing emergency and non-emergency livelihoods and generating incomes

o Rebuilding essential services (electricity and water) and infrastructureso Providing psycho-social supporto Supporting grassroots peace and security initaitives

ICRS livelihood framework: Information, Counselling, Referral, Serviceo Info: Displacement Tracking Matrix, community profilingo Counselling on the livelihood needs of IDPso Development of the Community Revitalization Programme (CRP)

IOM currently providing assistance to 44 communities across 10 governorates through the CRP

o Select and prioritize communitieso Local consultation with community leaders and local government to

develop action plan (e.g. types of community assistance projects that will be done)

o 6 components Individual assistance Community assistance projects Business development services Capacity building Psychosocial support Humanitarian Information Coordination

Action points (if any)

Any questions regarding the program should be forwarded to Ashley Carl Investigate possibilities of joint data analysis using some of the information

gathered by IOM under their CRP as a base for social cohesion

SESSION 2: Led by:

Objectives Lesson learned for two case study on how the resource can be identified for project and how the projects can be implemented in sustainable livelihood vs. emergency livelihood

Summary Ayman from Relief International: Two case study was brought from field on value chain as shown below :

The Nedafa project in Myssan and Najafy Kitchen both on a social enterprise venture “please refer to the attached files “ , showing the way project implemented and asked participate for group working to answering three questions as below

1- What resource from among the following resource would be needed for this business to be developed (Human assets, Physical assets, Financial assets, social assets, natural assess?Outcome from group activities that the case study include all resources above through using skills and community networks ,trust ,row material ,space for implementing in both projects

2- How would projects differ if it was done in an emergency context instead of sustainable context?

Outcome from group activities that projects can be implementing on mobile base instead of using fixed premises or relocate profit differently via vendor supply or running project for short period with increase number of beneficiaries , activates need space for work “prepare food “can be moved to be at home which then leave an extra space for IDP’s to settle in .

3- How would enterprise bring social cohesion to the communities? Outcome from group activities #Change target beneficiary to include all (IDP,HC, Syrian refugees) #Conflict assessment need to take place shows the way to bring mediators to facilitate supporting on social cohesion #Bring outside idea into existing projects. # Promoting, interaction of mix group.

Action points (if any)

N/A

SESSION 3: Lessons Learned from Emergency Livelihoods and Social

Cohesion Activities in IraqLed by: Ayser (DRC), Ayman (RI)

Objectives Summarize recent activities by Relief International and Danish Refugee Council Present lessons learned from these activities, and how the cluster may address

these concerns moving forwardSummary Ayman from Relief International:

Lessons learned from social cohesion and livelihoods activities in Iraqo Hanan: the story in brief o Hanan cooks lunch for Relief International, she is an IDP fled from

Mosul and now living in Erbilo Extra food to take home and paid foro She will tell people about her life, and how she carries about her job o Hanan sometimes doesn’t have time to cooko So she will ask food from neighbors, vendorso Hanan’s suppliers are host community members o Her clients are also host community members / IDPs / Syrian refugeeso An example of how many people can be fit onto a value chain o Will she still be perceived as an IDP? OR is she perceived as a

beneficial part of the local community? RI Projects that are currently being done

o Economic Empowerment of Widowso Women Leveraging the internet for Financial Transformationo Empowering Vulnerable Iraqis through Enterpriseo Advancing Widows Assistance via Enterprise

Lessons learned: o Employment of refugees and IDPs in RI-supported businesseso Applying learning through encouraging new value chains to employ

displaced populations living outside campso Develop new projects that promoting social cohesion through value

chain development Lessons learned: from sustainable livelihoods to emergency livelihoods

o Identify short-term, medium-term, and long-term solutionso Applying learning: providing recommendations to FAO & WFPo Develop new projects that makes deliberate efforts for promoting social

cohesion through livelihoods and ‘do no harm’

Action points (if any)

N/A

SESSION 4A: Regional Best Practices on Livelihoods and Social CohesionLed by: Jos de la Haye & Hyewon Jung (UNDP Regional)

Objectives Present an overview of regional case studies and how regional concepts may apply to the Iraq context

Receive feedback from regional / national partners on the most effective ways to address livelihoods and social cohesion in Iraq

Summary Short term: livelihoods stabilization Medium term: local economic recovery for employment and reintegration Long term: employment and inclusive economic growth

o Take place with differing intensities Country examples: Lebanon

o Livelihoods sector Temporary rapid income generating activities and improved

local infrastructure Access to market information and training Capacity of the MSME’s sector to create jobs Priority work:

National livelihoods plan Working with MoSA Reaching the most vulnerable Lebanese through

improved targeting Harmonizing approaches on modalities for C4W and

vocational training programme Strengthen the evidence base on the impact of Syrian

labouro Social Stability Sector

One of the three key objectives of the Lebanon Crisis Response Plan

No ‘cohesion’ vocabulary due to the fact that the gov’t doesn’t want to have social integration

This re-phrasing may be restrictive KEY to note: Lebanese context is very different from the Iraq

context Need to assess levels of social cohesion

Understand how tensions are changing, and how the fabric becomes more strained

Need knowledge on the structural causes of social tensions Syria

o Livelihoods was the main activity for response plan for Syria for 2014o Conflict setting: hard to show social cohesion o Livelihoods is a really tangible thing that can be showno Now, trying to build social cohesion into livelihoods

Phase-in approach of integrating social cohesion and livelihoods

o Many local NGOs are working on social cohesion within Syria (easier for them politically, and they have access to networks)

o Keep livelihoods, but use the programme as a vehicle to extend work to community dialogue

o Try to identify through networks that are there: Are there safe public spaces? Facilitate peacebuilding at the communities (actors) Use existing mechanisms / strengthen them to support social

cohesion You can have a livelihoods project, and then use that as a

vehicle for social cohesion Jordan

o Try to link social cohesion with different components

o Livelihoods to local governance to rule of lawo One of the projects on livelihoods is implementing value-chain

development Value-chain assessments on the potential of job creation Focusing on solid waste management Generation of economically sustainable green jobs Enhancing the capacity of local bodies to manage solid waste

o 3X6 livelihoods approach Inclusion through emergency income generating activities Ownership through joint ventures and access to finance To Sustainability through value-chain development and market

access Used in Yemen now But with the new crisis, the priorities have readjusted to

emergency employment Social cohesion development committees in Yemen

Sudano Road to stabilization: community security and stabilization programmeo Communities benefit from participatory planning and asset construction

Seasonal employment of IDPs and refugees (Community Security and Stabilization Programme)

Links between livelihoods and social cohesion: o Quality and frequency of inter-community contacto Relation and trust with local institutionso Perception related to assistance provided by various organizationso Causes of tensions (economic, social)

Action points (if any)

Using knowledge from the regional and corporate levels, develop a country-specific strategy to social cohesion and emergency livelihoods

SESSION 4B: Links between Livelihoods and Social CohesionLed by: Jos de la Haye & Hyewon Jung (UNDP Regional)

Objectives Establish an understanding of programmatic links between livelihoods and

social cohesion Identify ideas that can be applied to the present emergency context

Summary Can you give two examples of how you see the connection between livelihoods and social cohesion in your program?

Establishment of social connections through economic transactions i.e. the example of Hanan with Relief International

o Donation of agricultural crops to the IDPs after it being planted in the Ninewa plains

Volunteerism between communities of IDPs and host communities Multi-purpose loan in Ainkawa: high numbers of IDPs and refugees

o Women involved in community centerso Joint learning and ideas exchange between IDPs, refugees, and host

communities Employment and closer interaction: by providing IDPs / refugees / native

community members with access to the economy they can be closer Strengthening participatory planning: decision-making capacity Vocational trainings for host communities, IDPs, and refugees

What are the two main challenges you see to make the connection between livelihoods and social cohesion?

Asymmetry: perceptions of unfairness between IDPs / host communitieso Higher risk in programs that integrate social cohesions and livelihoods

Lack of trust to participate with others along the community Tradition holding participation back Language barriers

Action points (if any)

Further discussions on these programmatic links and how they may be established to be held at the cluster and partner level

Wrap UpLed by: Ann Ward (UNDP)

Objectives Identify the feedback from the workshop

Summary Positives: Very interactive Best practices from different agencies / IOM / NGOs Specific NGO case studies Came further to narrow down the Social Cohesion Assessment

So-so: No action plan More participation from the national NGOs IT support Regional best practices were a little less helpful

Action points (if any)

Submit any outstanding comments from the workshop over the feedback form.