INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY;

1. INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY; SHELTERING URBAN AND NON CAMP BASED REFUGEES IN LEBANON AND JORDAN Shelter Meeting 13B

2. Majority of refugees are not in camps but residing within private rental arrangements in urban/peri-urban areas (800,000 registered refugees in Lebanon – 15% in ITS. 550,000 in Jordan – <120,000 in Zaatari (?)). However camps are very visible and it is much easier to provide assistance • Direct cash rental support can have an inflationary effect on the market • Especially in saturated markets • Impacts on local renters • Host communities becoming increasingly frustrated with presence of refugees. WHAT CAN WE DO?

3. A Market driven philosophy • 2 possible ways to address urban support • Increase access to credit (inflate the bubble....) or • Increase the housing stock • Unfinished buildings are very common in Lebanon and Jordan • Incremental construction done as people can afford to do so – generally to pass onto children when they marry or as families increase in size. • Banks offer loans at usually high levels of interest

4. The approach (simplified & evolving) • ‘Advertise’ a need for unfinished buildings within the local community – owners contact NRC through a hotline. • NRC team visits buildings to assess suitability • Technical team prepare BoQ • Social team (with Legal/ICLA support) prepare contracts and match HH with owner/building • Staged conditional payments made to owner to undertake works (Jordan = $2000 & Lebanon = $1500) • Families allowed to stay rent free for 12 (L) or 18 (J) months

5. “Its too expensive” Lebanon (costs are approximate) Annual costs per Household in a collective centre = $3000 Shelter = $250, + Latrine = $350, + WASH infrastructure, + winterisation, + rents paid by refugees, +++ Jordan Tent/storage/handling/kitchen = $<1000 + WASH + infrastructure Shelter = >$2000 + WASH + infrastructure E.G roads in Azrak have cost $12 million – or $240 pp assuming 50k population

6. The benefits include • Incentivisation of host communities – provides a clear benefit to hosting refugees without inflating the rental market • Conditions generally better • Potentially less health/protection issues • ‘Sustainable’ fund usage – investment remains unlike • Facilitates relationship management between the communities – Jordanian authorities assist with reference checks of landlords • Can increase longer term availability of housing stock for the local rental market

7. Complications include • Very difficult to scale up - systems limitations; • 6000 HH (L) 4500 HH (J) (target for 2014 =7500 HH) • Time demands • Ideally need significant follow up capacity • Efficient way of making payments is key • Completed buildings could potentially attract greater rents in the private sector • Rogue landlords – increasing rents or pulling out before hosting starts. Do we take them to court? • Only applicable in areas where large stock of unfinished buildings!

8. Incentivisation of host communities – a way forward? • Happy host communities = easier assistance environment • Inherent value/costs of hosting need to be better appreciated by the humanitarian community. • Understanding of local rental laws allows contracts to become the risk management tool to facilitate decision making around investment. Preventing eviction a potential programme in itself. • Repairs and upgrades the possible next step? • Investment with ‘multipliers’ – energy related support (solar heaters/insulation etc) could increase ‘payback’ for owners

9. Questions? jake.zarins@nrc.no