Engaging GoE on the issue of displacement , perspectives in 2009

1. EngagingGoE on the issue of displacement, perspectives in 2009 • Context on Displacement, developments in 2008-2009 • Strategic directions to address displacement • Response: examples Borena-Liben and Gambella • A way forward: Shift to Disaster Risk Management(DRM)

2. Developments in 2008 and 2009 • Some new developments in 2008 and 2009 have helped to open new space for discussing internal displacement and response in Ethiopia: • Dissolution of DPPA and creation of DRMFSS with a focus on disaster risk management • Inclusion of non-food sectors in national needs assessments (and launch of Education cluster) • Articulation of strategic directions for increasing the engagement of the Govt on IDP issues • Based on response to specific instances of internal displacement, which gave opportunity for replication/scaling up (good practices in Filtu in Somali region and Gambella in end of 2008)

3. IDPs Response in Ethiopia: Constraints • GoE has so far not recognized the status of IDPs, with the result, up to mid 2008 that: • Absence of GoE focal point for IDPs • No systematic or standardized IDPs assessments, no mapping nationwide • Difficulty to gather information on IDPs , their status and needs, as well as of the needs of the host community affected by displacement (ex. additional burden on social services) • Not enough coordinated, slow and often inadequate response to needs • Lack of development of a comprehensive strategy to guide IDPs response • Inadequate funding for response as not included in country requirements

4. Strategic directions on Engaging GoE to strengthen response to IDPs • Efforts to engage GoE on enhancing response to IDPs situations are currently articulated in three complementary approaches: • Undertake assessment and response to new displacements jointly with govt at woreda and regional levels and strengthen their capacity (decentralization), while engaging the federal level when needed (sector mainstreaming). • Strengthening the policy and legal framework, particularly through appointment of a national IDPs focal point (i.e. Ministry of Federal Affairs) and ratification of the AU IDP Convention • Engagement through DRM cycle to gain a better understanding of displacement and strengthen GoE capacity to prevent, mitigate and respond to needs predictably

5. Complementary Measures • In support to these approaches, other means are being taken, including: • Improving assessment methodologies and tools to identify displaced and at-risk populations. (Ex. Non Food national assessment, inclusion of displacement/conflict in the wash and education sectors) • Use HRF and other flexible funding to cover gaps in joint response plans. (Ex: Project funded by HRF in Gambella to support coordination and Non Food Items distribution 2009, Project funded by HRF in Somali Region for the implementation of voucher system for Non Food Items distribution).

6. IDP Response in Ethiopia - 2009 • Gambella • Chronic displacement due to cattle raiding from Sudan • Approximately 30,000 displaced since January 2009 • Joint assessment in March & verification assessment in April (incomplete initial data) • Other chronic dispacement due to floods affect the same population • Response mainstreamed within taskforce to some extent (NFT) • Liben-Borena • Chronic community-level conflict over resources & administrative boundaries • Up to 160,000 displaced in February in dispute over borehole • First joint (GoE, UN, NGOs) assessment covering 2 regions • Joint assessment late March; most response delayed until May • Response mainstreamed within taskforce to some extent (FT, Health)

7. Lessons Learned: Progress • Regional govts willing to engage • Govt and humanitarian partners including UN, NGOs and Donors responsive to joint needs assessments • Coordinating through local govtsto regional govts& through regional govtsto federal has built trust, empowered each level in accordance to the new DRMFSS shift towards decentralization but is also time consuming (e.g. in Liben-Borena initial concertations started in March but little response until May) • Responding to IDPs as part of a larger vulnerable population rather than singling them out increases adequacy of response

8. Lessons Learned: Challenges • Shared understanding of needs can be challenging: quality analysis is necessary to identify locally what are the real needs versus standardized response (taking into account pre-displacement situation and situation of the host community) as well as monitor the evolution of needs over time (when response is delayed) as other factors may appear (such as secondary displacement, migration, return, spontaneous resettlement, etc.) • Different assessment standards • More response should be channeled through taskforces for improved coordination and resource mobilization (either at local or national level)

9. Lessons Learned: Challenges • Timeliness of response across-(regional) borders and between actors: different speed to deliver assistance may induce a perception of inequitable response and fuel existing conflicts/tensions • Response too slow and assistance focused, does not yet fully address needs in prevention, mitigation and early recovery aspects • Ambiguity of displacement in pastoral context (versus mix-migration)

10. Lessons Learned: Challenges • Differentiating emergency vs. development needs : assessment can bring to light chronic needs of the host community (many displacements occur in a very short distance, thus some needs may be similar) for which relief is needed (and national mechanisms used) or development gaps bridged, both of which a specific assessment/response plan on IDPs situation cannot fully cover (as long as coordination/mainstreaming with taskforces is not improved) • UN Leadership roles

11. Applying the IASC Strategy in Ethiopia • Pre-dates the cluster approach, but nonetheless is the most recent explicit guidance from IASC on IDPs Suggestions based on the Ethiopian experience: • Need to take into account a decentralized approach: • structure in IASC guideline is top-down and centralized, but effective strategy in Ethiopia is (partly) bottom-up and decentralized • Strategy relies on strong HC engagement but this is not always practical • Need for more varied approach to address complex displacement: • Most displacement in Ethiopia is complex – mixed migration, chronic, pastoralist (migration can be positive coping mechanism when does not exceeds usual patterns while sedentarism negative), or due to slow onset disaster or multiple trigger events. • Protection needs to be mainstreamed (ex: gender, child protection, etc.)

12. A way forward: a possible aspect Disaster Risk Management Versus Disaster Management

13. Advantages of DRMFSS new focus on DRM • DPPA • Response only • Bias towards food security • DRMFSS • DRM paradigm shift towards risk management incorporates prevention, mitigation preparedness, response and early recovery • Inclusion of non-food sectors in assessments

14. Hazard: a geographically specific component Vulnerability: can differ for specific elements (humans and non-humans ) Capacity: 2 components Individual Survivability and Community Readiness Based on hazard profiling Disagregated data and prioritization at wareda level allows better targeting of uncaptured groups within vulnerable socio-economic groups(ex. women, the elderly, children, Disabled and the Sick, temporarily/chronically displaced groups within a host community, etc.) Actions can be drawn to strenghen both aspects for more impact Calculation of coping mechanisms and vulnerabilities (complement and strenghen the LIU method) Defining disaster risk in a multisectoral way Hazard ≠ Disaster Disaster Risk = Hazard X Vulnerability Capacity Advantages

15. How DRM and Displacement can be linked A broad understanding of natural and man-made disasters (that includes conflict) can enhance the capacity to prevent, mitigate and respond to disaster risks that induce displacement (ex: floods, drought, conflict, etc). It can help find sustainable solutions for temporarily or chronically displaced population and reduce their vulnerability, if adequately targeted. Following the new shift towards DRM from DRMFSS, there is an opportunity to improve coordination between humanitarian and development actors. The shift can promote more flexible funding and improve mobilization (for example for preparedness plans and implementation)

16. THANK YOU Questions and remarks Email: nadia_zuodar@yahoo.com Tel: +41764794273 SDCSecondmentUNOCHAEthiopia, Addis Ababa