LINKING RELIEF REHABILITATION AND

DEVELOPMENT

GROUPE URD

Groupe URD is a French research institute whose main goal is to:Improve quality of humanitarian practices through debate, research, evaluation, capacity building, training and lobbying.

Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and development

It aims to draw lessons from current experience to inform policy and programmes, for NGOs, donors, international agencies and governmental institutions.

The LRRD project focuses on the 6 following sectors: Agriculture Irrigation and water supply Nutrition Health Urban Development Education

And includes a team of 4 technical members from Groupe URD, two independent consultants, a pool of junior experts, a project coordinator, permanently based in Kabul, and scientific support from headquarter and partners in Afghanistan

Main Objectives

Learning and sharing lessons in this period of political and technical transition, through multi-sector review

Increasing and sharing knowledge and experience by carrying out applied research in rural and urban settings in specific fields (including food and economic security and urban development):

- 4 different agrarian systems throughout Afghanistan- 3 cities (small/middle/big)In partnership with interested NGOs

Contributing to the capacity building efforts of the relevant ministries and Afghan NGOs through trainings

Agenda

1. Focusing on people’s needs

2. Understanding the context and linkage with policy making

3. Rebuilding the state

4. LRRD: a new set of stakeholders, new trends

A BIT OF THEORY

AND MODELISATION

TYPOLOGY OF CRISES

Development Development

Crisis

Reconstruction

Emergency

Rehabilitation

The Continuum theoryThe Continuum theory

TYPOLOGY OF CRISES: not that simple

 

 

 

   

1   

    

3     

COMBINAISON OF PREVIOUS CASES : THE CONTIGUUM CONCEPT

 

2

44

NEED OF NEW METHODS AND APPROACHES

Which can tackle the State building agenda (the peace and democracy agenda);

Which can ensure that the needs of people are responded to (vulnerability agenda) and a humanitarian response capacity still preserved (the Humanitarian Space agenda)

Which can ensure that a vivid civil society can develop and democracy progressively can nurture (civil and civic agenda)

Which can ensure that economy will progress at the micro and macro levels (economic agenda)

FOCUSING ON PEOPLE’S NEEDS

Keeping a focus on people / humanitarian needs while moving towards reconstruction

and development

Vulnerabilities still need to be address

Remaining vulnerabilities coexistence of Relief, Rehabilitation and Development needs high level of structural and circumstantial vulnerabilities

Decreasing focus on vulnerabilities Phasing out of some « relief donors » and stakeholders Increased focus on high potential and easy accessible areas

Developing a formal space for humanitarian interventions in the development strategies

Main challenges:

Integrating vulnerabilities and relief issues in the current reconstruction and development frameworks

Designing and implementing relevant programmes adapted to the needs and constraints for vulnerable areas and/or vulnerable population’s groups

Addressing vulnerabilities in insecure areas

Integrating approaches and programmes

Designing specific policies and strategies (drought mitigation, floods control)

Designing specific planning and programming

Designing specific action-research towards difficult areas

Having formal and efficient information, decision making and intervention systems (early warning systems and preparedness plans)

Long term commitments from the donors

NGOs remain an important stakeholder for implementation /advocacy

More holistic approach (FS or livelihoods conceptual frameworks) for assessment, monitoring and evaluation is required

Main requirements(through the Food Security case study)

CONTEXT UNDERSTANDING & LINKAGE WITH POLICY MAKING

To fulfil the tremendous requirements for diagnosis in order to design and adapt policies and programmes to

the context complexity and diversity

Insufficient or inadequate diagnosis

Limited, un-adapted and low-quality diagnosis (spatial, holistic, …)

Lack of capacities and expertise Lack of coordination

Challenges: Highlight the missing information of the relevant

needs and their prioritization Define and implement a plan of action

Gaps between policy making and field operations

A contrasted situation within the sectors

Lack of interaction: NGOs are not able or not willing to participate Government and donors do not really seek for NGOs’ views

Suggestions: Need to encourage relationships between policy making and field

stakeholders in order to ensure that policy design is fully adapted to field’s realities

Donors have a role to play in integrating NGOs in policy design processes

Gap between urban territories and urban responsibilities

The post-crisis changes in urban sector result in the creation of new urban context and areas

Very few updated spatial information on urban context

Services are not delivered in the illegal settlements (not mapped)

No common spatial references for urban planning, reconstruction and coordination between the different stakeholders

Case study :Lack of spatial data in Urban sector

Some progresses in 2006 Land tenure issues are finally addressed thanks to its assignment to the

Ministry of Agriculture Rehabilitation in Kabul allowed by the recent agreement between KM

and MoUD (KURP) Ongoing spatial regional analysis aiming at a balance between the

Urban Land and rural development (SDP)

More progresses are required Further diagnosis (geographical, physical, social/technical ,transport….) Establishment of a validated document compiling data Establishment of flexible city master plans

Urgent need to place urban issues within a spatial and collective understanding

REBUILDING THE STATE…after a protracted crisis, and the succession of different models

Rationalisation of the state

Different factors are hindering the functioning of the Afghan State: Lack of fiscal system Although efforts made, responsibilities still somewhat blurred Ministries and upper administration are still very much subject to cabinet

and political changes Human resources management is not always based on competences

Efforts are made to foster a rationalization of the State through the PAR and PRR processes

Numerous ministries are going through the PRR process but some remain at the first stage, the second stage raising more difficulties

Thus, this process should significantly improve the efficiency at national and local levels, and need to be implemented quickly in order to improve notably service delivery and therefore secure stability of the country

Ownership and accountability in the reconstruction period

After the fall of Taliban, there was a sudden substantial injection of funds and a mass influx of stakeholders (donors, technical assistants, consultants, private contractors, IFI, UN agencies, NGOs): Clear effort in building and strengthening ministerial capacity and

setting national programmes

However, still limited ownership at all levels Donors push for quick impacts in the field (securing peace), and

want to influence policies and often push for their own agendas through technical assistants

On donors’ side: is there a long term commitment? On government side: still limited “absorption capacity”

Case study:service delivery sectors, health and education

In education and health sectors, models were set very early on a national scale. In health sector it is implemented through PPA and carried out by other actors,

NGOs. In education sector, the service delivery is fully managed by the state

Country-wide programmes: High expectation Limited consultation of the Afghan counterparts in the choice of the strategic

orientations: Ownership? Appropriateness?

Rationalization process ongoing in MoE and MoPH, it is necessary for: Sustainability of the services, currently highly dependent on external funds, Quality of the services delivered

LRRD: A NEW SET OF STAKEHOLDERS, NEW

TRENDS

GoA

Afghan NGOs

Communities

Donors

Technical Assistants

PRTs

Skills / expertise

Security / Poppy

Political agenda

Funds availability

Humanitarian space

International stakeholders

Afghan stakeholders

IFIs

INGOs UN agencies

Private sector

Linking relief, development and… security

Main bilateral donors are investing massive amounts of money in the South of the country (Kandahar, Uruzgan, Helmand)

Need to ensure a strong commitment to the south What about the buffer zone and the northern part of the country? Cost effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the interventions are difficult

to assess (Remote control strategies)

The prerequisite for long-term development in the south in not yet in place.

PRTs are playing an increasing role Are PRTs the sole relevant model to work in insecure areas? If, yes what

are they doing in the North… Debate on the confusion humanitarian/ military? Relevance, cost effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the interventions

are questionable Lack of coherence and coordination with other long-term strategies

Finding the right pace in between building capacities, new roles and responsibilities

The state have defined the main policies (master plan, policies, norms and standards)

Rules are often overlooked Ex: Infrastructure sector (quality, sustainability, cost effectiveness)

Capacities for monitoring and regulations are not yet defined or applied at the field level

Abruptness of change in the transition in between stakeholders’ roles

NGOs: key players in the reconstruction process NGOs have gathered skills, expertise and in-country experiences NGOs are a enabling actor to strengthen the private sector’s development

(food processing entr.) Addressing vulnerabilities / Developing the Private sector should come

along

Sharing responsibilities for building development

ISSUES AT STAKE

Issues at stake

Equity – balanced development

Civil society and democracy

Long term peace

Crisis-response capacities in the development agenda