World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement A N I N D E PE N D E N T E VA LUAT I O N © 2019 International Bank for This work is a product of the staff of The RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank with external contributions. The material in this work is subject World Bank The findings, interpretations, and to copyright. Because The World 1818 H Street NW conclusions expressed in this work Bank encourages dissemination Washington, DC 20433 do not necessarily reflect the views of of its knowledge, this work may be Telephone: 202-473-1000 The World Bank, its Board of Executive reproduced, in whole or in part, for Internet: www.worldbank.org Directors, or the governments they noncommercial purposes as long as full represent. attribution to this work is given. Attribution—Please cite the report as: World Bank. 2019. World Bank Group The World Bank does not guarantee Any queries on rights and licenses, Support in Situations Involving Conflict- the accuracy of the data included in including subsidiary rights, should be Induced Displacement. Independent this work. The boundaries, colors, addressed to Evaluation Group. Washington, DC: World denominations, and other information World Bank Publications, The World Bank. shown on any map in this work do not Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, imply any judgment on the part of The Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: World Bank concerning the legal status 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@ Cover Image: Romina Paula Cicerello / of any territory or the endorsement or worldbank.org. madlycreatives.com. acceptance of such boundaries. World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION June 20, 2019 Careful observation and analysis of program data and the many issues impacting program efficacy reveal what works as well as what could work better. The knowledge gleaned is valuable to all who strive to ensure that World Bank goals are met and surpassed. contents abbreviations v acknowledgments vi overview vii management response xv management action record xx report to the board from the committee on development effectiveness xxviii Background and Context 1 Toward a Development Approach to Forced Displacement 3 Scope of the Evaluation 5 Methodology5 Evolution in Country Strategies, Advisory Services and Analytics, and Financing 9 Country Strategies Results and Performance of 11 the World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics 12 Financial Support World Bank Group 2015 17 AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION Policy Dialogue and Strategic Partnerships 35 Leveraging Policy Dialogue for Institutional Change and Reform 37 Leveraging Coordination Platforms and Partnerships to Improve Coherence and Avoid Duplication 39 Engaging with Partners to Learn Lessons 46 Catalyzing the Private Sector 48 Removing Impediments to the World Bank Group’s Development Approach 51 External Factors 52 Internal Factors 53 Conclusions and Recommendations 55 Careful observation and analysis of program data and the many issues bibliography 58 impacting program efficacy reveals what Boxes works as well as what could work better. The Definition of Forcibly Displaced People Box 1.1.  2 knowledge gleaned is The World Bank Group’s Development Approach to Situations of Forced Displacement Box 1.2.  valuable to all who 4 strive to ensure that World World Bank Support to Internally Displaced Persons Box 2.1.  13 Bank goals are met and Box 2.2.  World Bank Analytical Work: Shifting the Discourse on Refugees surpassed. 15 Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group iii  he Global Concessional Financing Facility and the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Box 2.3. T Communities: Underpinning the Development Approach 23 The 18th Replenishment of IDA and the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities Program Box 2.4. in Cameroon 25 E xample of Operationally Relevant Knowledge Collaboration Box 3.1.  43 The Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.2.  44 The Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role (continued) Box 3.2.  45 The Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role (continued) Box 3.2.  46  he Partnership Landscape in Lebanon and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.3. T 47  he Partnership Landscape in Lebanon and the World Bank’s Role (continued) Box 3.3. T 48 Figures Figure 1.1. Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons Globally, 2000–17 3 Theory of Change: Engaging in Situations of Forced Displacement through a Development Approach Figure 1.2.  7 World Bank Group Engagement in Countries with Large Forcibly Displaced Populations at the Country Figure 2.1.  Strategy Level, FY00–17 12 Advisory Services and Analytics by Completion Year, FY03–17 Figure 2.2.  14  orld Bank Commitments for Situations of Conflict-Induced Forced Displacement by Approval Year, Figure 2.3. W FY00–17 18  rojects Directly Supporting IDPs and IDP Host Communities by Approval Year, FY00–17 Figure 2.4. P 19  rojects Supporting Refugees, Refugees and Host Communities, and Host Communities by Approval, Figure 2.5. P FY00–17 20 Focus and Response Areas for Key Partners Figure 2.6.  28 Appendixes Appendix A. Methodological Approach 67 Appendix B. Countries with Refugees or IDPs and World Bank Engagement 89 Appendix C. World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics 93 Appendix D. World Bank Lending Portfolio  108 Appendix E. Case Study Matrix Findings 126 Appendix F. Landscape of Key Humanitarian and Development Partners 204 Appendix G. Closed Projects: Outputs and Outcomes 208 iv World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Contents abbreviations CMU Country Management Unit CRRF Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework DFID U.K. Department for International Development FCV fragility, conflict, and violence FY fiscal year GCFF Global Concessional Financing Facility IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IDA International Development Association IDA18 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association IDP internally displaced person IEG Independent Evaluation Group IFC International Finance Corporation IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development PSW Private Sector Window UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund WFP World Food Programme All dollar amounts are U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group v acknowledgments This evaluation was prepared by an Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) evaluation team led by Susan Caceres (senior education specialist) and Ann Elizabeth Flanagan (senior economist) under the guidance and supervision of Emanuela Di Gropello (manager) and Auguste Tano Kouame (director). Caroline Heider, Director-General, Evaluation, and Sophie Sirtaine, director of strategy and operations, provided overall direction. Marie Gaarder, former manager, and Rasmus Heltberg, acting manager, supervised the approach paper. Jozef Leonardus Vaessen, methods adviser, provided support at critical points in the evaluation process. Stephan Wegner, adviser, provided valuable contributions throughout the evaluation process. Members of the core evaluation team included Anahit Aghumian, Konstantin Atanesyan, April Connelly, Aline Dukuze, Maria Dumpert, Gisela Garcia, Daniel Palazov, and Anthony Martin Tyrell. Portfolio analysis, case studies, analytical review, and additional analyses were supported by Mauricio Carrizosa, Nils Fostvedt, Judith Hann Gaubatz, Rawaa Harati, Humay Guliyeva, George Kanakis-Polenakis, Basil Kavalsky, Sama Khan, Eduardo Fernandez Maldonado, Sarah Deardorff Miller, Hjalte Sederlof, Pallavi Sengupta, Arianna Ranuschio Totte, Judyth Twigg, Stijn Van Weezel, and Disha Zaidi. Roger Zetter provided technical expertise to the team. Robert Yin provided methodological expertise to the team. Estelle Raimondo assisted with the theory of change. Maximillian Shen Ashwill, Kia Penso, and Amanda O’Brien provided editorial and production support. Aline Dukuze led the production of the final report. The team also acknowledges the advice received from Bahar Salimova on the recommendations and Management Action Record. Peer reviewers were Elizabeth Ferris (senior fellow, Foreign Policy Studies Program, the Brookings Institution), Cindy Huang (codirector of Migration, Displacement, and Humanitarian Policy, and senior policy fellow, Center for Global Development), and Ewen Macleod (senior advisor to the high commissioner at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). Their comments strengthened the evaluation’s approach and the report. The team thanks World Bank Group staff interviewed while scoping for the evaluation and staff in Country Management Units and the Fragile, Conflict, and Violence Global Theme, who provided critical information and feedback to the team. IEG thanks the World Bank Group offices and representatives of governments, private sector entities, international and bilateral development organizations, and civil society in Ethiopia, Lebanon, Turkey, and Uganda for their time and support. vi World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Acknowledgments highlights In 2016, the World Bank Group stepped up its engagement in situations of conflict- induced forced displacement at the global and country levels and adopted Overview a new approach to its engagement that recognizes displacement as a development challenge that must be addressed to attain the World Bank Group’s twin goals. Since fiscal year 2016, the Bank Group’s analytical, financial, and operational support has become more aligned with its stated development approach building on lessons from past engagements. This is an important shift. Advisory services and analytics have shifted from providing a rationale for Bank Group engagement in situations involving conflict- induced forced displacement to context- specific needs assessments focused on evidence-based, medium-term solutions. The World Bank successfully mobilized new financing to support situations involving conflict-induced forced displacement and crowded-in funding from other donors. World Bank support for populations forcibly displaced by conflict and their host communities has vii increased, become more balanced, and focused on priority sectors to generate economic opportunities. These are significant achievements. At the same time, the Bank Group has not yet fully leveraged its comparative advantages in implementing its development approach. Evidence generated from analytical and advisory services needs to be translated better into context-specific policy dialogue, project design, and programming. Project design, in particular, could further address the specific needs and vulnerabilities of conflict-induced forcibly displaced persons and their host communities, especially the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the women and children among them. Projects should also more systematically include specific indicators to monitor and evaluate the effects on affected populations. The World Bank engages and coordinates with humanitarian actors and development organizations at various levels, but coordination could be further strengthened. Additionally, select partnerships at the country level could be leveraged to ensure sector coherence and to foster policy dialogue to enact institutional reforms toward self-reliance that address the vulnerabilities of forcibly displaced persons. The Bank Group could also increase engagement to catalyze the private sector’s role in situations of conflict-induced forced displacement. Internal and external factors inhibit the Bank Group’s development response to address situations of conflict-induced forced displacement. Internal factors include varying levels of active leadership in Country Management Units, growing but still limited Bank Group experience, and incentives. External factors include the varying nature of displacement situations, government capacity, macroeconomic and development challenges, and complex political economy factors. viii Knowledge World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Flow and Displacement | Overview Collaboration | Section T H I S E VA LUAT I O N C O M E S at a critical time. Globally, 68.5 million people are forcibly displaced because of conflict or violence (the conflict-induced forcibly displaced or forcibly displaced persons, as used in this report). Between 2000 and 2017, the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) doubled from 20 million to 40 million, and the number of refugees rose from 18 million (including refugees under the United Nation’s Relief and Works Agency’s mandate) to 25.4 million—fueled by violence and conflict in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, and Syria. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 1 in every 110 people in the world is a refugee. Including IDPs, conflict displaces someone—somewhere—every two seconds.Eighty-five percent of the world’s forcibly displaced live in low- or middle-income countries. Currently, 60 of the World Bank Group’s country clients have large, conflict-induced displaced populations, thus threatening the institution’s ability to achieve its twin goals of poverty reduction and shared prosperity. The magnitude of the problem for Bank Group client countries and the increasingly protracted nature of forced displacement have added to the recognition within the Bank Group that forced displacement requires a development response. Forced displacement creates specific vulnerabilities for refugees and IDPs. The forcibly displaced lose rights, assets, livelihoods, and social capital when they flee their homes. Displacement causes many to experience trauma; women are particularly at risk. In 2016, the Development Committee of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund endorsed a new approach to support conflict-induced forced displacement that targets both the forcibly displaced and their host communities by capitalizing on the Bank Group’s comparative advantages. The Bank Group views the development challenge of forced displacement as a corporate priority and a long-term challenge. The development approach focuses on addressing the specific vulnerabilities associated with forced displacement, mitigating the impact of forced displacement on host communities, focusing on institutions and policies to promote economic opportunities and self-reliance, supporting medium-term solutions through development planning, and partnering with others for a coordinated response. Awareness is growing that the humanitarian model of care and maintenance is unsustainable in the longer term and that forced displacement requires a development response to complement humanitarian assistance. This evaluation’s purpose is to assess the Bank Group’s approach and support to countries hosting IDPs, returnees, and refugees and provide evidence-based lessons to inform the Bank Group’s future role in this area. A fundamental objective of the evaluation is to highlight lessons from the past and emerging lessons from recent experience to facilitate learning and to inform the Bank Group as it moves forward. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group ix The Independent Evaluation Group carried out this evaluation at the request of the Board of Executive Directors’ Committee on Development Effectiveness. The evaluation is intended to inform the ongoing implementation of the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18) and discussions on the 19th Replenishment of IDA and to help shape the Bank Group’s future support for IDPs, refugees, and host communities. Overall, the evaluation finds that, notably, between fiscal year (FY)00 and FY18, the Bank Group’s strategies and support have increased, evolved, and moved in the direction of a development approach. However, the Bank Group is not yet fully leveraging its comparative advantages in implementing its intended development approach. The Bank Group’s Support: Advisory Services and Analytics and Financing Bank Group country strategies reveal limited but evolving engagement in countries with large forcibly displaced populations. Post-FY15 strategies show increasing awareness and understanding of the effects of forced displacement on forcibly displaced people and host communities and the need for a development response in situations of forced displacement. In line with the development approach, the World Bank’s recent and ongoing analytical work has promoted a more context-specific understanding of displacement situations and the vulnerabilities that displaced populations face. This is a shift from earlier analytical work that provided a rationale for World Bank engagement in forced displacement situations. External stakeholders recognize the World Bank’s leadership in analytical work that focuses on medium-term solutions and the constraints to economic opportunities, self-reliance, and resilience for both the forcibly displaced and their host communities. External experts believe the Bank Group’s analytical work helped transform international discourse on refugees by providing evidence of positive and negative impacts on host communities. There is scope, however, to use the World Bank’s analytical work better. Analytical work that focuses on context-specific understanding and medium-term solutions should further inform policy dialogue and project and program design to address the unique constraints that host communities, IDPs, refugees, and returnees face. The World Bank could, where relevant and appropriate, further leverage other partners’ analytical work. The World Bank’s financing and operational support for displacement-affected populations have increased—in line with the growing prominence of forced displacement crises among stakeholders. The Bank Group has supported IDPs for many years. Recently, the Bank Group’s support to forcibly displaced people expanded to situations of cross-border displacements and support to refugees. World Bank annual commitments to forced displacement increased between FY00 and FY17 from $178 million to $1.6 billion, with a significant increase in FY16–17. Concessional financing, IDA financing on exceptional terms, and other grant money targeting refugees contributed to this increase. x World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Overview World Bank support to IDPs and refugees has become more balanced. Through three distinct time periods (FY00–09, FY10–15, and FY16–18), the World Bank’s engagement has evolved to simultaneously address the needs of displaced people and their host communities, consistent with the development approach. The balanced approach to addressing forced displacement is expected to create cobenefits, mitigate the harmful impacts of displacement, and create political goodwill through a win-win proposition. The Bank Group is working with a diverse group of partners to crowd in resources for programming for the forcibly displaced. Between FY16 and FY18, the Bank Group helped establish two new refugee-specific financing instruments: the Global Concessional Financing Facility (GCFF) for middle- income countries and the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities for eligible IDA countries. These new financing instruments build on lessons from prior instruments, including multidonor trust funds. The degree to which refugees benefit from GCFF projects varies, depending on context and political economy factors. Recently, GCFF donors have pushed for more targeted, refugee-specific, support to ensure both refugees and vulnerable host communities benefit fully from concessional financing. There are still aspects where World Bank operations are not aligned fully with the development approach. Although the World Bank leverages its sector expertise for its development operations and supports projects to enhance economic opportunities, programming and interventions could be further tailored to the needs and constraints of the displaced and vulnerable groups (including host communities) in host countries. While acknowledging the complexity of the contexts, programming and operational design need to more consistently address the multiple barriers to improving income and self-reliance for forcibly displaced persons. The link between gender analyses and displacement programming is another area in need of improvement. The degree to which operations are gender sensitive varies considerably from country to country. A critical point is to improve monitoring and evaluation efforts to learn from interventions. Evidence of impact from World Bank operations is lacking because refugee operations were implemented only recently. Also, projects lack specific indicators to monitor and evaluate the effects on displaced populations—with slight improvements in more recent operations. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) has a small portfolio supporting the forcibly displaced and affected host communities. IFC supported four projects: two microfinance institutions in Lebanon (one focused on host communities and another providing balanced support to refugees and host communities) and two projects in Jordan (one that provided balanced support to refugees and host communities and another that focused on refugees). Recent IFC diagnostic work in Kenya showed the viability and rationale for private sector engagement in situations of forced displacement. After a market assessment, IFC crowded-in resources to establish the Kakuma Kalobeyei Challenge Fund in Kenya to encourage businesses to invest in the refugee camp and host community. IFC also conducted a stocktaking of entry points and approaches used by the private sector in situations of forced displacement, helping to address information gaps among private actors. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xi The Bank Group’s Policy Dialogue and Strategic Partnerships The Bank Group is positioned well to engage in dialogue with governments because it works primarily through governments. It can bring key ministries into the dialogue on refugees and IDPs that might not otherwise engage in forced displacement, such as ministries of finance and planning. The Bank Group can also help coordinate government responses across ministries. However, client country–focused engagement also means that governments can define priorities, and policy dialogue might not be advanced on politically sensitive topics, causing the neglect of policy and institutional reforms to promote economic opportunities. The evaluation found that the World Bank has only recently focused on institutional changes and policy reforms for medium-term solutions, such as supporting regulations improving the conditions for economic opportunities in Jordan and Turkey. The World Bank engages and coordinates with humanitarian actors and other development organizations, but coordination could be further strengthened, and selective partnerships leveraged at the country level to ensure sector coherence and foster policy dialogue. In Jordan, the World Bank and other donors have coalesced, formally and informally, around the Jordan Compact. Other country platforms work less well owing to various constraints. The evaluation also found scope for continuing to pursue more informal, context-specific selective partnerships. The Bank Group’s efforts to catalyze the private sector to implement a development approach in situations of forced displacement are still nascent. External stakeholders indicated that the Bank Group can add real value by increasing knowledge and bringing partners together to explore mechanisms for private and informal sector investment to support job creation for the forcibly displaced and host communities. However, the Bank Group’s current level of investment in (or current production of) knowledge in this area is modest. Because the displaced settle in different types of environments (urban areas or lagging regions), numerous approaches will need to be explored and studied. Recommendations This evaluation finds that the Bank Group needs to leverage its comparative advantages more fully to realize its intended development approach. First, the World Bank needs to further improve the contextualization of its interventions to the needs of the displaced and vulnerable groups in host communities, building on its recent analytical work. Second, it will also need to better monitor the outcomes of displaced populations. Third, it will need to strengthen coordination at the country level and further leverage selective partnerships with other development and humanitarian partners based on comparative advantages. Coordination with other partners will be particularly important to address the unique, dynamic, and context-specific nature—including political economy factors—of many forced displacement situations and to guide the World Bank’s efforts to selectively use its instruments in those contexts. Fourth, the Bank Group should also step up its efforts to catalyze the private sector. Fifth, realizing the potential of the development approach will also require addressing xii World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Overview internal institutional constraints. These include the World Bank’s growing but still limited experience working in situations of forced displacement, varying levels of commitment and leadership among Country Management Units, and the lack of incentives for the required proactive, time-intensive policy dialogue, project design, and collaboration among Country Management Units, Global Practices, and Global Themes, and between them and external partners. The evaluation makes five recommendations for the Bank Group to fully leverage its comparative advantages to operationalize its intended development approach. Recommendation 1. Intensify the use of analytical work related to conflict-induced forced displacement to inform policy dialogue, programming, and operational design. This could involve better aligning policy dialogue, programming, and the design of operations, with the context-specific understanding and medium-term solutions emerging from analytical work that focuses on institutional changes and the needs of the displaced—including women and children—and host communities. Recommendation 2. Improve monitoring and evaluation to demonstrate the intended development impacts on displaced populations and host communities—especially women and children. This may entail clearly defining monitorable outcome indicators; disaggregating these indicators, including by gender and age (as relevant) to monitor outcomes for forcibly displaced populations and host communities; and building capacity at the country level to target relevant populations and monitor results. Recommendation 3. Foster selective partnerships with key humanitarian and development agencies at the country level and promote stronger coordination with key agencies and the government to leverage the World Bank’s comparative advantages to operationalize the development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may guide the World Bank’s efforts to selectively use, sequence, or customize its instruments while supporting further sector coherence and policy dialogue with client governments. This may entail more systematically mapping the activities of humanitarian and other development agencies to identify respective areas and sectors of comparative advantage; customizing types of partnerships and coordination mechanisms to local contexts and partners’ mandates; and, among other factors, setting up clear expectations of country-level and sector-specific objectives and streamlined coordination arrangements to make coordination mechanisms and partnerships work better. Recommendation 4. Identify and catalyze private sector solutions to promote the self-reliance and resilience of the displaced and host communities. This may entail the Bank Group conducting analytical work to address knowledge and information gaps in how to engage effectively with private actors in the formal and informal sectors and in a diverse set of situations of forced displacement. This may also entail the World Bank, IFC, and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency identifying market opportunities and business models, adapting instruments, addressing weaknesses in the policy and regulatory frameworks, providing information to create business opportunities, and working with existing and new partners (such as philanthropic organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and social enterprises) who support private sector development. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xiii Recommendation 5. Ensure Country Management Units can effectively operationalize the World Bank Group’s development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may entail making sure Country Management Units have the required expertise and incentives to engage governments in sensitive dialogue; push for contextualized, medium-term programming for refugees and host communities; and invest in time-intensive coordination processes, both across the Bank Group and with other partners. xiv World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Overview management response The management of the World Bank Group welcomes the report of the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG), World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement. The report’s review of Bank Group activities in response to forced displacement within the changing context of conflict-induced refugee and internally displaced persons (IDPs) movements will help facilitate learning and inform the Bank Group as it moves forward. Management notes the report’s recognition of positive changes in the Bank Group’s approach to forced displacement. We appreciate the opportunities pro- vided to engage with IEG colleagues through discussions at various stages of the evaluation. World Bank Management Comments The report comes at an important milestone in the World Bank’s engagement on conflict-induced displacement. The IEG evaluation notes dramatic shifts in the international context of forced dis- placement, with the sharp increase in the numbers of displaced, the increasingly protracted nature of displacement, and the cross-border and regional dimensions of what is today a global crisis. The adoption of a new overarching framework in 2016 demonstrates the World Bank’s commitment to playing a larger and more active role in tackling forced displacement from the onset as a development issue. The 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18) Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities (RSW) and the Global Concessional Financing Facility were estab- lished in this context to provide dedicated financing for the forcibly displaced. The World Bank’s en- gagement in the recently negotiated Global Compact for Refugees helped shift its tone and substance from a pure humanitarian agenda to one that also reflects longer-term development goals. The World Bank subsequently facilitated the launch of the Multilateral Development Bank Platform on Economic Migration and Forced Displacement to define a common framework for Multilateral Development Bank engagement to strengthen multilateral coordination. The IEG report is therefore timely in that it flags emerging lessons that can be factored in the World Bank’s ongoing and future efforts. Management welcomes the report’s emphasis on its learning objective. Over the report’s review period (fiscal year [FY]00–17), the World Bank’s lending and Advisory Services and Analytics increased exponentially after 2016. The majority of the portfolio has been approved since FY16 under the new approach, so it is still too early to derive broad conclusions. For example, the RSW started on July 1, 2017, and the Global Concessional Financing Facility was announced on September 20, 2016. Both are very early in their implementation, with operations recently becoming effective and starting imple- mentation. Nonetheless, the report offers useful early guidance for ongoing and planned interventions under the new Bank Group approach. The World Bank will continue to conduct and leverage its analytic work to inform its country programs, individual operations and policy dialogue on forced displacement. The World Bank had commissioned significant pieces of sector work that introduced a development lens into what was earlier addressed as a humanitarian emergency. Recent diagnostics such as “Yes” in My Backyard? The Economics of Refugees and their Social Dynamics in Kakuma, Kenya (2016); Toll of War: The Economic and Social Consequences of the Conflict in Syria (2017); and The Mobility of Displaced Syrians: An Economic and Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xv Social Analysis (2019) and a number of household surveys and impact evaluations helped shape the global debate on forced displacement. Various instances of its detailed diagnostics already feed into project design and influence strategy. Many of these in-depth analyses are prepared in partnership with other organizations and illustrate the Bank Group’s contributions to the emerging international consen- sus on the development approach. The forced displacement crisis in Bangladesh provides an example of how the World Bank deployed a strategic cluster of analyses to inform its operations, with a Rapid Impact Vulnerability and Needs Assessment laying the foundation for an emergency response opera- tion in Bangladesh. The politicized nature of forced displacement often affects the uptake of analytical work. Political economies vary markedly across country contexts. In some countries, like Ethiopia, the RSW provid- ed a critical entry point that catalyzed legislative and policy shifts at the highest level. In others, policy change takes longer, given public sensitivities, and government plans can be derailed by political and security issues beyond World Bank or government control. In such cases, a more incremental approach to sectoral policy changes is more realistic. Analytical work offers a useful entry point for dialogue, and studies that quantify the impact of refugee inflows on hosting communities and model the development dividends of different approaches have been influential. Nonetheless, local political economy factors, the intensity and duration of the displacement-inducing conflict and the role of other financiers may limit the extent to which the World Bank’s analytical work can influence policies and programming. The use of analytics also depends on the context. Certain instances of forced displace- ment occur suddenly and require a rapid response, such that full diagnostics have to follow rather than precede the design of the operation. The World Bank in such situations will continue to maintain a monitoring brief to ensure that its knowledge base is relatively up to date. That in turn will allow it to respond swiftly when required. Given the substantial investments required in time, resources, and internal and external collaboration, the World Bank will continue to line up and prioritize its analytics. Management appreciates the finding that gender and child-specific issues are not fully integrated into World Bank support or monitoring. With 50 percent of refugees being female and 52 percent children, it is critical to emphasize these issues in its programs for the displaced and host communities alike. Already, more than half of RSW-approved projects incorporate specific analysis and actions to address gaps between males and females in refugee and host communities, and more projects of this kind are in the pipeline. Efforts will continue to ensure that project designs are tailored to directly address the specific needs of refugee and host communities, especially those of women and girls. The innovative and challenging nature of this work could be further recognized. Much of the World Bank’s engagement in this space is on new and sensitive topic areas, and this requires a risk toler- ance and a willingness to invest time and resources into careful preparation, protection monitoring, and mitigation of social risks. Experience shows that it takes considerable effort to tailor conventional sectoral approaches to the specific vulnerabilities these groups face. Effective implementation also requires experimentation, learning, enhanced monitoring, and regular revisions to adapt to changing circumstances. xvi World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Management Response Management will continue to strengthen its monitoring and evaluation framework in situations of forced displacement. While recognizing a challenge in identifying suitable outcomes that can be achieved within the scope of its interventions in volatile and rapidly-evolving emergency situations, Management will continue to strive to be agile and adaptable when defining attainable outcomes. There are other challenges throughout implementation. In addition to the absence of reliable data and weak client capacity, access constraints due to security concerns or possibilities of direct attacks can also impede monitoring and evaluation. Management will continue leveraging technology and pioneering innovative mechanisms, such as the geo-enabling initiatives for monitoring and supervision, and use of appropri- ate technology available (for example, remote sensing, internet platforms, mobile phones and radio). The collaboration between the World Bank and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) to establish a Joint Data Center will reap benefits in the medium term. The center will collect and analyze population and socioeconomic data, facilitate open access to that data, promote inno- vation, and strengthen the sustainability of a global data collection system that can serve analytics, dialogue, and operations. Partnerships are central to World Bank programs in situations of forced displacement. Among many international actors working in forced displacement, the UNHCR remains the core partner as the World Bank deepens its engagement in this area. The working relationship between the World Bank and UNHCR has already led to concrete outcomes, including strengthened humanitarian-development complementarity in programming, coordinated policy dialogue with client governments, and close monitoring of the protection environment in RSW countries. The World Bank is also working closely with the World Food Programme in a number of refugee situations, such as Bangladesh and Chad. It is also engaging in the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework and other country mecha- nisms that aim to convene humanitarian and development actors. The World Bank engagement in the Republic of Yemen shows a new way of working in complex emergencies with large internal displace- ment, predicated on effective and equal partnership with United Nations agencies. IDA’s convening power was used to leverage financing and knowledge, coordinate with the United Nations’s in-country implementation capacity, and mobilize a multidimensional operational response. New operational modalities are being piloted to address the compound crises that are increasing in frequency, com- plexity, and duration. In Somalia, the World Bank has strengthened partnerships with the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Food and Agriculture Organization to deliver services in the most remote and insecure parts of the country which host large IDP populations. The partner landscape and dynamics differ from case to case. Management recognizes that address- ing the complexity of forced displacement requires strategic partnerships across the humanitarian, de- velopment, peace-building, and security dimensions. At the same time, partnerships and coordination are transaction and resource intensive. The World Bank will therefore foster strategic partnerships that would best respond to the specific country context and client demand, in line with its programmatic priorities, institutional mandate, comparative advantage, resource envelope, and capacity. Management will continue to explore opportunities to strengthen the livelihoods of the displaced and host communities through private sector solutions. This will be contingent on the local context, political econo- Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xvii my, risk appetite, and client buy-in. The role of the formal private sector in the context of forced displace- ment will depend on the anticipated returns on private investment and market demand. The informal sector continues to provide a bulk of income generation opportunities for refugee and host communities. Strong leadership by the Country Management Unit (CMU) and coordinated engagements as a country team with expertise from multiple Global Practices will be essential to operationalize the development approach in situations of forced displacement. The CMUs lead policy dialogue, navigate client relations, and build strong country teams to integrate, coordinate, and set the overall parameters of engagement. The Global Practices operationalize the approach, bring in technical expertise and provide substantive re- sponse through analytical work or operations. Where refugee settlements straddle neighboring countries, the response may also require coordination between different CMUs or regions. Management will contin- ue its effort to foster, facilitate, and incentivize both CMU leadership and multi–Global Practice responses to pursue an effective approach in situations of forced displacement by building an analytical base and lessons learned and also by adapting tools, instruments, and internal processes. IFC Management Comments International Finance Corporation (IFC) management thanks IEG for the evaluation, World Bank Group’s Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement. The report’s comprehensive review of the Bank Group’s activities in response to forced displacement provides a valuable knowl- edge base on this evolving topic and represents a substantial contribution to greater understanding of this important and urgent development challenge. The evaluation’s recognition that the private sector can support refugees and their host communities is aligned with IFC’s role of catalyzing the private sector to address important development challenges. Bringing private sector solutions to refugees and host communities fits well with IFC’s 3.0 strategy, which aims to stimulate private sector interventions in challenging geographies and to underserved target groups. IFC’s overall objective is to ensure that, in the long run, forcibly displaced persons can support themselves via economic opportunities and that their presence is beneficial to their host com- munities. IFC’s direct engagement in situations related to forced displacement crises is relatively new. More broadly, the concept of deliberately engaging and leveraging private sector solutions in this space is nascent for the development community. As the evaluation notes, viable investment opportunities have been scarce; this is due both to the regulatory and policy barriers noted in the report (such as limita- tions to refugee employment) and to the conditions of extreme poverty and insecurity that surround ref- ugees. The evaluation accurately reflects projects and initiatives related to forced displacement that IFC has implemented in this area to date, such as interventions in the Middle East and North Africa Region that have focused on microfinance and vocational training, and the analytical work IFC has undertaken in collaboration with UNHCR in support of the Kakuma camp in Kenya. xviii World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Management Response IFC management agrees with the report’s recommendation that the Bank Group needs to strength- en its efforts to identify and catalyze private sector solutions to create economic opportunities and promote self-reliance and resilience of the displaced and host communities. As the report correctly points out, every situation of forced displacement is very different from the others and so requires the development of contextualized and customized solutions. To address this challenge, IFC intends to undertake a needs-based approach, using analytical work to understand and address the development needs of forcibly displaced populations and their host communities, building on IFC’s reports Kakuma as a Marketplace: A Consumer and Market Study of a Refugee Camp and Town in Northwest Kenya (2018) and Private Sector and Refugees: Pathways to Scale (2019). Key focus areas for further work include tools and approaches for expanding economic opportunities for forcibly displaced populations and host communities, such as preparing refugees and host communities for work through skills devel- opment, job creation through supporting businesses that hire refugees, and expanding refugees’ and host populations’ access to finance, in particular through microfinance. These approaches aim to help support refugees while displaced and help prepare them for return, while taking into account the needs of host communities. Other areas of focus may include provision of basic services, strengthening the capacity of host countries, and improvements to the business enabling environment. IFC will continue proactive efforts to create markets, increase private sector investment, and develop a knowledge base to better guide and monitor private sector–led interventions in forced displacement space. IFC recognizes the importance of key partnerships to address the challenges of forced displacement and intends to engage with key development and other partners to enable the private sector’s engage- ment in creating solutions and supporting forcibly displaced populations and their host communities. One example of a new engagement is the Partnership on Jobs, Education for Forcibly Displaced and Host Communities in East Africa and in the Middle East and North Africa established between the Government of Netherlands, IFC, the International Labour Organization, the United Nations Chil- dren’s Fund, the World Bank, and UNHCR. It aims to help transform the way governments and other stakeholders, including the private sector, respond to forced displacement crises through involvement of various development actors. The partnership is IFC’s most comprehensive effort to date to adopt a strategic and coordinated approach. Within this framework, IFC is looking to deploy a range of advisory and investment-enabling instruments, such as blended finance, to (i) improve the stability and predictability of the business environment and the quality of regulations; (ii) facilitate job creation op- portunities in sectors open for foreigners and refugees to be employed; (iii) promote access to finance and financial inclusion for vulnerable communities especially through micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, by furthering partnerships with multilateral financial institutions and banks to enhance their capacity to expand financing; (iv) support education and market driven vocational and entrepreneur- ship skills development; and (v) finance infrastructure and basic services through the private sector. IFC management appreciates that IEG has covered this important topic at a time where many develop- ment actors, including the Bank Group, are reevaluating and strengthening their approaches to forced displacement. IFC will incorporate knowledge from this report as it continues exploring the role of the rivate sector and the comparative advantages of the Bank Group in this space.N Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xix management action record Intensify Analytical Work IEG FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The World Bank’s analytical work is recognized by external experts as adding real value because of its medium-term, context-specific socioeconomic focus—a focus that other development and humanitarian actors do not generally have. Analytical work on internally displaced persons (IDPs) has highlighted context-specific constraints such as land tenure (Syria and Uganda), social protection (the Central African Republic and South Sudan), and livelihoods (Georgia, Indonesia, and South Sudan). The World Bank’s most recent analytical work focuses on understanding implementation challenges and recommending policies to facilitate medium-term solutions, such as refugee self-reliance through access to labor markets and economic opportunities. However, the evaluation finds that evidence generated from analytical work could be further leveraged to inform policy dialogue, programming, and project design. For example, ensuring that projects focused on economic opportunities include attention to education, training, and skills, and the necessary policy and institutional changes to facilitate medium-term instead of short-term solutions (for example, economic opportunities versus labor-intensive public works). Additionally, key informant interviews suggest that the intersection between local political economy considerations and IDPs and refugees’ unique vulnerabilities must be well understood. Political sensitivities often create restrictive policies (for example, allowable sectors for refugee employment). Analytical work that provides evidence of the positive effects of refugees on host communities and analysis of specific vulnerabilities, as was the case in Jordan, Kenya, and Turkey, could be further used in policy dialogue and project design. Constraints should be identified up front and built into project design, programming, and policy dialogue—especially the unique circumstances of women, who face more constraints than men, including elder or child care responsibilities, social structures, or cultural norms associated with female labor force participation. Despite consistent findings of the vulnerabilities of women and children in the World Bank’s analytical work, gender and child-specific issues are not fully integrated into World Bank support or monitoring. Good examples of gender-informed operations should be replicated—such as those in Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon. IEG RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1. Intensify the use of analytical work related to conflict-induced forced displacement to inform policy dialogue, programming, and operational design. This could involve better aligning policy dialogue, programming, and the design of operations, with the context-specific understanding and medium-term solutions emerging from analytical work that focuses on institutional changes and the needs of the displaced—including women and children—and host communities. ACCEPTANCE BY MANAGEMENT Agree. MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Management will continue to conduct and leverage its analytic work to inform its country programs, operations and policy dialogue on forced displacement. Analytical work offers a useful entry point for dialogue, and studies that quantify the impact of refugee inflows on hosting communities and model the development dividends of different approaches have been influential. Nonetheless, local political economy factors, the intensity and duration of the displacement-inducing conflict and the role of other financiers may limit the extent to which the World Bank’s analytical work can influence policies and programming. The politicized nature of forced displacement often affects the uptake of analytical work.Political economies vary markedly across country contexts. In some countries, like recently in Ethiopia, the xx World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Section RSW provided a critical entry point that catalyzed legislative and policy shifts at the highest level. In others, policy change takes longer given public sensitivities, and government plans can be derailed by political and security issues beyond World Bank or government control. In such cases, a more incremental approach to sectoral policy changes is more realistic. The use of analytics also depends on the context. Certain instances of forced displacement occur suddenly and require a rapid response, such that full diagnostics have to follow rather than precede the design of the operation. The World Bank will in such situations continue to maintain a monitoring brief to ensure that its knowledge base is relatively up- to-date. That in turn would allow it to respond swiftly when required. Given the substantial investments required in time, resources, and internal and external collaboration, the World Bank will continue to line up and prioritize its analytics. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xxi Improve Monitoring and Evaluation IEG FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Monitoring in projects supporting issues of forced displacement focuses on immediate outputs. Of the 54 closed and evaluated projects providing direct support to forcibly displaced populations or host communities, 16 reported intermediate or longer-term outcomes. The majority collected output data such as the number of beneficiaries receiving project support; intermediate outcome indicators typically measured access to services. Very few projects have included any longer-term outcome indicators. The World Bank’s forced displacement projects lack specific indicators to monitor and evaluate effects on displaced populations; however, the situation has improved. Between FY00 and FY09, 19 percent of projects disaggregated project monitoring indicators by group; in FY10–17, 49 percent of projects disaggregated monitoring indicators. This trend needs to continue. In addition, among operations approved between FY12 and FY17, most (39 of 42) disaggregate indicators by gender, but only 14 of 42 projects plan to disaggregate by gender and forcibly displaced status. Since forced displacement disproportionately affects women and children (80 percent of refugees are women and children), and these groups are among the most vulnerable, World Bank support requires careful attention, targeting, and nuancing to address these vulnerabilities and special needs, and the indicators need to be fully disaggregated to monitor project results. IEG RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 2. Improve monitoring and evaluation to demonstrate the intended development impacts on displaced populations and host communities—especially women and children. This may entail clearly defining monitorable outcome indicators; disaggregating these indicators, including by gender and age (as relevant), to monitor outcomes for forcibly displaced populations and host communities; and building capacity at the country level to target relevant populations and monitor results. ACCEPTANCE BY MANAGEMENT Agree. MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Management will continue to strengthen its monitoring and evaluation framework in situations of forced displacement. While recognizing a challenge in identifying suitable outcomes that can be achieved within the scope of its interventions in volatile and rapidly-evolving emergency situations, Management will continue to strive to be agile and adaptable when defining attainable outcomes. There are other challenges throughout implementation. In addition to the absence of reliable data and weak client capacity, access constraints due to security concerns or possibilities of direct attacks can also impede monitoring and evaluation. Management will continue leveraging technology and pioneering innovative mechanisms, such as the geoenabling initiatives for monitoring and supervision, and use of appropriate technology available (for example, remote sensing, internet platforms, mobile phones and radio). The collaboration between the World Bank and United Nations High Commission for Refugees to establish a Joint Data Center will reap benefits in the medium term. The center will collect and analyze population and socioeconomic data, facilitate open access to that data, promote innovation, and strengthen the sustainability of a global data collection system that can serve analytics, dialogue and operations. xxii World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Management Action Record Foster Partnerships and Promote Coordination at the Country Level IEG FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Partnership is one of the four pillars of the development approach. Building strategic partnerships and strengthening coordination can improve the coherence and impact of the international community’s response to forced displacement at the global and country levels. However, in some cases, the World Bank may not be ideally positioned to lead country-level policy dialogue. External stakeholders suggested that, at times, other actors might be better placed to create entry points to engage in dialogue related to IDPs. Additionally, case studies have observed greater potential impact for the World Bank in stable situations. In countries such as Somalia and South Sudan, the World Bank’s model of working centrally through the government using its systems is challenged. However, the World Bank has been able to find entry points and customize its intervention even in unstable or sensitive situations by working with partners. For example, the World Bank is partnering with humanitarian organizations in the Republic of Yemen to implement its projects. Lessons from the past suggest that, wherever possible, this model could be replicated in similar contexts. In other contexts, the World Bank has pragmatically focused on analytical work rather than other activities (at least in the short term) to create awareness, for example, in Turkey. World Bank staff and external informants also noted a need to strengthen coordination to ensure greater sector coherence. For instance, a mapping exercise showed that humanitarian actors are actively involved in medium-term livelihood support. This suggests an area of overlap, where coordination will be important. Partnerships and coordination can take different forms. For instance, the Bank Group has a formal partnership with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; however, the evaluation also found scope for continuing to pursue more informal and ad hoc selected partnerships. Country platforms can enhance coordination with multiple donors and governments. Partnering and coordinating with humanitarian organizations on policy dialogue must take the institutional mandates of the organizations into account since humanitarian organizations often focus on more narrow populations of concern, whereas the Bank Group’s mandate is to reduce poverty and improve shared prosperity for the poor and vulnerable. Overall, World Bank staff need to be aware of the donor landscape in each country and how the World Bank can best define and execute its role and comparative advantages. The evaluation also highlights some factors, such as streamlined partnership or coordination arrangements and clear expectations on country- and sector-level objectives, as important aspects of effective coordination and partnerships. IEG RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 3. Foster selective partnerships with key humanitarian and development agencies at the country level and promote stronger coordination with key agencies and the government to leverage the World Bank’s comparative advantages to operationalize the development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may guide the World Bank’s efforts to selectively use, sequence, or customize its instruments, while supporting further sector coherence and policy dialogue with client governments. This may entail more systematically mapping the activities of humanitarian and other development agencies to identify respective areas and sectors of comparative advantage; customizing types of partnerships and coordination mechanisms to local contexts and partners’ mandates, and, among other factors, setting up clear expectations of country-level and sector-specific objectives and streamlined coordination arrangements to make coordination mechanisms and partnerships work better. ACCEPTANCE BY MANAGEMENT Agree. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xxiii MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Partnerships are central to World Bank programs in situations of forced displacement. The working relationship between the World Bank and United Nations High Commission for Refugees has already led to concrete outcomes, including strengthened humanitarian-development complementarity in programming, coordinated policy dialogue with client governments and close monitoring of the protection environment in RSW countries. The World Bank is also engaging in the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework and other country mechanisms that aim to convene humanitarian and development actors. IDA’s convening power was used to leverage financing and knowledge, coordinate with the UN’s in-country implementation capacity, and mobilize a multidimensional operational response. New operational modalities are being piloted to address the compound crises that are increasing in frequency, complexity and duration. The World Bank will continue to emphasize strategic partnerships aligned with its program and client priorities. Management recognizes that addressing the complexity of forced displacement requires partnerships across the humanitarian, development, peace-building and security dimensions. At the same time, partnerships and coordination are transaction- and resource- intensive. Further, the partner landscape and dynamics differ from case to case. The World Bank will therefore foster strategic partnerships that would best respond to the specific country context and client demand, in line with its programmatic priorities, institutional mandate, comparative advantage, resource envelope, and capacity. xxiv World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Management Action Record Engage the Private Sector to Promote Self-Reliance and Resilience IEG FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The institutions of the World Bank Group need to work together to catalyze private sector engagement. External stakeholders believe the World Bank Group can add real value in catalyzing the private sector—in creating knowledge and bringing partners together to explore mechanisms to nurture formal and informal private actors to support job creation for forcibly displaced and host communities by identifying and leveraging entry points for engagement. Overall, the Bank Group’s efforts to catalyze the private sector to implement a development approach in situations of forced displacement remain constrained because of political economy constraints— where policy and regulatory barriers that facilitate private sector engagement are hard to reform. The Bank Group will need to engage in dialogue with governments, the private sector (formal and informal, foreign and local), and other development partners to improve preexisting regulatory and policy frameworks that constrain the fuller engagement of the private sector and private investment. For example, recent efforts in Lebanon show the Bank Group working together to support the government’s plan for public-private partnerships, advising the government on the public-private partnership law, and helping review potential projects and assessing the feasibility of private sector funding. The International Finance Corporation’s (IFC’s) engagement in supporting forcibly displaced populations and affected host communities is nascent and minimal. Overall, this is an emerging area of focus for IFC. Recent IFC diagnostic work showed the viability and rationale for private sector engagement in situations of forced displacement. However, IFC has yet to convert the knowledge from the innovative analytical work into a pipeline of viable investments. This is likely owing to existing knowledge gaps and policy and regulatory barriers. On the supply side, IFC’s work in fragile and high-risk environments requires adapted instruments, such as financing mechanisms to support small, upstream ventures; blended finance; and traditional financing for larger-scale investors. A concessional financing mechanism for IFC (and other private sector development institutions) might open opportunities for private sector engagement. Lessons from IFC’s support to fragile and conflict- affected states that apply to this context include the need for IFC to adapt its business model, instrument mix, risk tolerances, and staff incentives to be effective in these high-risk environments. IEG RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 4. Identify and catalyze private sector solutions to promote the self-reliance and resilience of the displaced and host communities. This may entail the Bank Group conducting analytical work to address knowledge and information gaps in how to engage effectively with private actors in the formal and informal sectors and in a diverse set of situations of forced displacement. This may also entail the World Bank, IFC, and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency identifying market opportunities and business models, adapting instruments, addressing weaknesses in the policy and regulatory frameworks, providing information to create business opportunities, and working with existing and new partners (such as philanthropic organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and social enterprises) who support private sector development. ACCEPTANCE BY MANAGEMENT Agree. MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Management will continue to explore opportunities to strengthen the livelihoods of the displaced and host communities through private sector solutions. This will be contingent on the local context, political economy, risk appetite and client buy-in. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xxv The role of the formal private sector in the context of forced displacement will depend on the anticipated returns on private investment and market demand. The informal sector continues to provide a bulk of income generation opportunities for refugee and host communities. IFC Management agrees with the report’s recommendation that the Bank Group needs to strengthen its efforts to identify and catalyze private sector solutions to create economic opportunities and promote self-reliance and resilience of the displaced and host communities. As the report correctly points out, every situation of forced displacement is very different from the others and requires development of contextualized and customized solutions. To address this challenge, IFC intends to undertake a needs-based approach, using analytical work to understand and address the development needs of forcibly displaced populations and their host communities, building on “Kakuma as a Marketplace” (2018) and “Private Sector and Refugees: Pathways to Scale” (2019) reports published by IFC. Key focus areas for further work include tools and approaches for expanding economic opportunities for forcibly displaced populations and host communities, such as preparing refugees and host communities for work through skills development; job creation through supporting businesses that hire refugees; and expanding refugees’ and host populations’ access to finance, in particular through microfinance. These approaches aim to help support refugees while displaced and help prepare them for return, while taking into account the needs of host communities. Other areas of focus may include provision of basic services; strengthening the capacity of host countries; and improvements to the business. enabling environment. IFC will continue proactive efforts to create markets, increase private sector investment, and develop a knowledge base to better guide and monitor private sector-led interventions in forced displacement space. xxvi World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Management Action Record Empower Country Management Units to Lead IEG FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Active leadership of Country Management Units (CMUs) is important for driving engagements in situations involving forced displacement. Case studies and key informant interviews identified variability in CMU responses to forced displacement: some CMUs engaged fully whereas others did not to avoid potential conflict with government clients. Also, CMU leadership is important for achieving synergies (also across institutions) and links across the 14 Global Practices and relevant Global Themes, such as Fragility, Conflict, and Violence and Gender. Further, the Bank Group’s new approach to situations of forced displacement requires unique experience, including a nuanced understanding of the local political economy, legal issues, employment rights, and cultural and economic integration challenges. This requires experience at the CMU, sector, and Global Theme levels. Additionally, other internal challenges impede the Bank Group’s development response, such as processes, time, and incentives. It takes additional time to plan, collaborate, and build consensus on how to address forced displacement. IEG RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 5. Ensure CMUs can effectively operationalize the World Bank Group’s development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may entail making sure CMUs have the required expertise and incentives to engage governments in sensitive dialogue; push for contextualized, medium-term programming for refugees and host communities; and invest in time-intensive coordination processes, both across the Bank Group and with other partners. ACCEPTANCE BY MANAGEMENT Agree. MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Strong leadership by the Country Management Unit (CMU) and coordinated engagements as a country team with expertise from multiple Global Practices (GPs) will be essential to operationalize the development approach in situations of forced displacement. The CMUs lead policy dialogue, navigate client relations, and build strong country teams to integrate, coordinate and set the overall parameters of engagement. The GPs operationalize the approach, bring in technical expertise and provide substantive response through analytical work or operations. Where refugee settlements straddle neighboring countries, the response may also require coordination between different CMUs or regions. Management will continue its effort to foster, facilitate and incentivize both CMU leadership and multi-GP responses to pursue effective approach in situations of forced displacement, by building analytical base and lessons learned and adapting tools, instruments and internal processes. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group xxvii report to the board from the committee on development effectiveness The Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) met to consider the report entitled World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement; and the draft management response. CODE welcomed the evaluation as a valuable learning tool and timely input to inform the upcoming 19th Replenishment of the International Development Association discussions and the development of World Bank Group’s fragility, conflict, and violence strategy. The committee acknowledged the magnitude of the crisis and expressed great support for the Bank Group’s role and its new development approach. Members commended the Bank Group’s ability to bring mid- and long- term predictable financial resources and provide valuable analytic work and innovative approaches to increase private sector engagement in these areas. They encouraged management to increase efforts to leverage the Bank Group’s convening power in mobilizing resources and partnerships with other stakeholders, including governments, development partners, and the private sector. The committee acknowledged management’s clarifications regarding the complexities and sensitivities of working with sovereign governments and their particular positions on who and what support refugee populations and internally displaced persons should receive. Members agreed on the need for the Bank Group to differentiate between short-term responses and medium- to long- term solutions through comprehensive policies and institutions promoting economic opportunities and self-reliance and mitigating the negative impact on host communities. The committee welcomed management’s broad agreement with the report’s findings and recommendations and encouraged management to come up with more concrete actions to systematically address the evaluation’s recommendations and increase the impact in the field. Members appreciated management’s commitment to leverage the World Bank’s analytical work on forced displacement to inform program design and policy dialogue; strengthen monitoring and evaluation, emphasize strategic partnerships, and seek out and support private sector solutions; and strengthen the role of Country Management Units to lead an effective and dynamic response. They were pleased to learn about improved data on forcibly displaced populations in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and encouraged management to reinforce the capture of information related to the most vulnerable among the forcibly displaced population, such as women, children, and youth. Members were pleased to hear about the “One Bank Group” approach to finding opportunities for private sector development related to refugee camps. They commended the International Finance Corporation’s efforts to support host communities with microfinance activities, vocational training, and new technologies and asked about the development impact of its actions. xxviii World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Report to the Board 1 C O N F L I C T- I N D U C E D FO R C E D D I S PL AC E M E N T is a global crisis that has become acute in recent years. Conflict- induced forced displacement (or forced displacement, as used in this report) refers to situations in which persons leave or flee their Background homes because of conflict, violence, persecution, and human and Context rights violations (box 1.1).1 Globally, there are 68.5 million forcibly displaced persons—a number likely higher than at any time since World War II—comprising 25.4 million refugees, 40 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), and 3.1 million asylum seekers. Between 2000 and 2017, the number of IDPs doubled from 20 million to 40 million and the number of refugees rose from 18 million to 25.4 million (figure 1.1). In 2017, there were 2.9 million new refugees, the largest annual increase on record (UNHCR 2018a). The precipitous rise was due to violence and conflict in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, and the Syrian Arab Republic (UNHCR 2018a; IDMC 2018). According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 1 in every 110 people in the world is a refugee. If including IDPs, someone— somewhere—is displaced every two seconds (UNHCR 2018a). Forced displacement is increasingly becoming an urban phenomenon, with 58 percent of forcibly displaced people settling in urban areas. Forced displacement disproportionately affects women and children: they make up 80 percent of refugees. Of these children, 52 percent are younger than 18 years old. These two groups are among the most vulnerable and are subject to abuse and violence. Support requires careful attention, targeting, and adapting to address these vulnerabilities and special needs. Evidence shows that displaced women have access to fewer services and employment opportunities than displaced men do (World Bank 2017a). Displaced children are also vulnerable because they are often forced to drop out of school to work (Verme et al. 2016). Forcibly displaced people remain displaced for protracted periods.2 Two-thirds of all refugees in 2017 (13.4 million people) Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 1 Definition of Forcibly Displaced People Box 1.1 |  This evaluation defines forcibly displaced people as individuals who leave or flee their homes because of conflict, violence, persecution, and human rights violations. Forcibly displaced people include refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) displaced by conflict or violence. This definition encompasses the following: Refugees are people who have been forcibly displaced because of conflict or •  violence in one country and have settled in another country. IDPs are people who have been forcibly displaced because of conflict or violence •  but stay in their country of origin. Returnees are IDPs or refugees who voluntarily return to their homes or •  communities. The evaluation also covers one other displacement-affected group: host communities, or areas where displaced people settle that are affected heavily by the influx of people. Source: World Bank Group 2016. Note: This definition is consistent with the 2016 Development Committee Report (World Bank Group 2016). Climate change, natural disasters, pandemics, or food insecurity can also cause people to flee their homes. These groups are excluded from the evaluation’s definition of forced displacement. have been displaced for five or more years. This is the result of, among other things, persistent conflicts and the inability of refugees and IDPs to voluntarily return or resettle (or for refugees, to repatriate to a third country), partly because governments’ reactions to both refugees and IDPs are often inimical. The growing forced displacement crisis is one of the most intractable and complex challenges facing the global community.3 Forced displacement takes place within some of the world’s most challenging environments and is linked to a variety of social, political, and economic drivers and outcomes. Eighty-five percent of the world’s forcibly displaced live in developing countries, and of the top 10 refugee-hosting countries, Germany is the only developed one (UNHCR 2018a). The clear majority of the forcibly displaced (72 percent) settle in lagging regions within countries (World Bank 2017a). The extreme poverty and human suffering associated with refugees and other displaced people exacerbate existing development challenges and affect the development prospects of host communities, countries, and regions. For example, the displacement of Syrians to Jordan has further strained the government’s fiscal capacity, posing a threat to the country’s social safety net. In many instances, inflows of people create winners and losers among the local population and economies. The Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) carried out this evaluation at the request of the Committee on Development Effectiveness. An important objective is to assess how the Bank Group’s approach 2 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 1 Figure 1.1 Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons Globally, 2000–17 | 50 40 Refugees and IDPs (millions) 30 20 10 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year Refugees IDPs Source: World Development Indicators; International Displacement Monitoring Centre of the Norwegian Refugee Council; UNHCR 2018a. Note: IDP = internally displaced person. “Refugees” includes groups of people who are in similar situations as refugees but have not obtained refugee status for practical or other reasons. Since 2007, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) refugee population figures also include people in refugee-like situations. World Development Indicators (WDI) data combine UNHCR data on refugees, people in refugee-like situations, and Palestinian refugees under the United Nations Relief and Work Agency’s (UNRWA) mandate. WDI refugee data in 2000 does not include the 5.4 million Palestinians projected under UNRWA. to situations of forced displacement has evolved over time in response to strategic priorities. The evaluation intends to inform the ongoing implementation of the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18) and the discussions for the 19th Replenishment. Toward a Development Approach to Forced Displacement The Bank Group’s mission is inextricably linked to the welfare of forcibly displaced people. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development identifies the threat forced displacement poses to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (UN 2015). The 2030 agenda encourages building self-reliance and resilience of forcibly displaced persons and host communities. Its pledge to leave no one behind is both humane and pragmatic and is fully consistent with the Bank Group’s mission. As part of the broader effort to achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, the objective of development actors—including the Bank Group—is to reduce poverty among the forcibly displaced and host communities and reduce the specific vulnerabilities of these groups. The World Bank Group increasingly recognizes that forced displacement requires a development response to complement humanitarian assistance. The international community has come to realize that the humanitarian model of care and maintenance is unsustainable in the longer term (and is not desirable from a human dignity perspective). A development response differs from the humanitarian Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 3 approach because it focuses on medium- to long-term development planning to complement—not replace—humanitarian aid. It is centered around institutions and policies and relies on partnerships with and between humanitarian actors, including UNHCR, the International Organization on Migration, and the World Food Programme (WFP); development actors (both bilateral and multilateral donors); the private sector; and civil society. Partnerships are required throughout the entire period of displacement to foster effective assistance (Christensen and Harild 2009; World Bank 2017a). The Development Committee of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund recognized forced displacement as a development issue in 2016. It laid out its development approach, building on work begun in 2009 under the Global Program on Forced Displacement (box 1.2). The approach shifts Bank Group engagement from being sequential (humanitarian first, development second) to complementary and requires coordination and partnership with humanitarian actors from the onset of a forced displacement crisis to provide a comprehensive response anchored in a medium-term perspective. Synergies between humanitarian and development assistance, based on comparative  he World Bank Group’s Development Approach to Situations of Forced Box 1.2 | T Displacement The World Bank Group identified four core dimensions for its recent development approach. • Socioeconomic aspects of the displaced: Tailored approaches and special interventions to address the specific vulnerabilities associated with forced displacement to reduce poverty among the forcibly displaced. Host communities: Interventions to address the negative impacts forced •  displacement imposes on host countries and host communities. An influx of forcibly displaced people poses a risk to progress made toward poverty reduction and shared prosperity. The Bank Group’s potential role includes building social cohesion and supporting economic opportunities to leverage opportunities presented. Medium- to long-term perspective: Institutions and policies to promote economic •  opportunities. Partnerships: Broad partnerships with government, other partners, the private •  sector, and civil society, especially in areas where the World Bank Group does not have a comparative advantage. Source: World Bank Group 2016. 4 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 1 advantage, increase the potential for dignified, sustainable solutions. Cooperation also helps build coherence in the response and avoid duplication and cross-sectoral overlap among actors. The Bank Group’s development approach to situations of forced displacement focuses on areas where it has a comparative advantage. These include Advisory Services and Analytics and data to inform policy dialogue, policy recommendations for institutional responses and country programming, sector expertise, convening power to build partnerships and promote global and regional responses, innovative financing solutions to crowd in resources and sustain engagement, and the ability to leverage the private sector (Christensen and Harild 2009; World Bank 2017a). In this context, Bank Group shareholders and management have dedicated additional resources to enable the Bank Group to increase its support to countries hosting large numbers of refugees. The adoption of a development approach in 2016 intends to shift thinking in the Bank Group away from individual projects to an approach that targets the unique vulnerabilities of the displaced and host communities and supports policies that help promote self-reliance. Scope of the Evaluation This evaluation focuses on the Bank Group’s engagement in situations of conflict-induced displacement. It omits other Bank Group experiences in displacement, including those caused by climate change, natural disasters, pandemics, or food insecurity. The objectives are to assess the Bank Group’s approach and support to countries and subregions hosting forcibly displaced populations and provide evidence-based lessons to inform the institution’s future role in this area. The evaluation emphasizes learning—from past support and emerging lessons from recent experience. The evaluation’s guiding questions are as follows:   How  has the Bank Group’s approach and support to situations of forced displacement evolved over time? To what extent has this been informed by strategic priorities? How has it incorporated lessons learned from experience to inform its scaling-up of support?   How  and to what extent has the Bank Group engaged with government, humanitarian and development partners, and the private sector? How has it positioned itself in relation to other partners in situations of forced displacement?   For  selected countries and subregions, how has the Bank Group addressed awareness, policy constraints, financing needs, and capacity constraints? How has the Bank Group addressed the needs of IDPs, refugees, returnees, and host communities in a balanced fashion? Methodology The evaluation highlights three time periods. World Bank support evolved from the period before the Global Program for Forced Displacement (fiscal year [FY]00–09) to a transition period, when awareness of the development approach was growing, and the Syrian refugee crisis brought new challenges (FY10–15), to the period of adoption of the development approach and incentivized funding mechanisms (FY16–18). Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 5 IEG constructed the evaluation’s theory of change—a visualization of the development approach to situations of forced displacement since FY16—based on Bank Group reports, a review of Bank Group support to forcibly displaced people and host communities, and the broader literature on forced displacement (figure 1.2). The theory of change assumes that the Bank Group (i) understands the context specificity of displacement situations, including the vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced, the effects on host communities, and constraints faced by the displaced; (ii) uses financing to support forcibly displaced individuals and mitigate the effects on host communities, often through balanced support to both groups; (iii) stimulates policy dialogue; and (iv) understands the broader landscape of donor, government, private sector, and humanitarian partners and coordinates with these actors to leverage its comparative advantage. The theory of change is a tool to assess the Bank Group’s progress toward its stated development approach (see box 1.2). The evaluation covers FY00–18 but recognizes that the development approach was not the Bank Group’s main paradigm between FY00 and FY15.4 Thus, the theory of change strictly applies to FY16 and later. It also provides a useful organizing framework for pre- FY16 engagements to identify, organize, and understand relevant lessons and trends. The theory of change establishes benchmarks for the Bank Group’s inputs—analytical, financing and operations, dialogue, and strategic partnerships—to realize its development approach. Cooperation between the Bank Group and other development and humanitarian actors is a condition needed across all inputs. The inputs are interrelated and not necessarily sequential, as reflected by the arrows in figure 1.2. For example, analytical work can feed directly into policy dialogue or strategic partnerships as well as financing. The inputs are likely to lead to the intended outcomes for the forcibly displaced, host communities, and government (as reflected by the green arrows depicting the causal chain). However, the theory of change also recognizes that there may be factors impeding the realization of the development approach—some within the Bank Group’s control and others not. The evaluation used a multilevel approach. At the global level, the evaluation conducted semistructured interviews with partners and commissioned two background papers: a review of the Bank Group’s financial instruments in fragility, conflict, and violence (FCV) settings and a global landscape of actors and issues related to IDPs and refugees. At the portfolio level, an in-depth analysis of Bank Group operations supporting refugees, IDPs, returnees, and host communities in situations of forced displacement was conducted. Reviews were also conducted of the Bank Group’s Advisory Services and Analytics and strategies, including Board of Executive Directors documents and country strategies. An important building block of the evaluation was a case-based analysis at the country and subregional levels focusing on the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda) and the Syrian refugee crisis (Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey). Case studies were conducted in 12 Bank Group client countries affected by forced displacement.5 Semistructured interviews were conducted with International Finance Corporation (IFC) staff, Bank Group Country Management Units (CMUs), staff in Global Practices and in the Gender and FCV Global Themes, and affected populations (during missions). Appendix A details the methodological design, including sampling and selection, sources of evidence, data collection and analysis methods, and triangulation. The evaluation begins by examining the Bank Group’s evolving engagement in forced displacement through its analytical work and projects—in particular, project design. Then, it examines how policy 6 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 1 FIGURE 1.2 | Theory of Change: Engaging in Situations of Forced Displacement through a Development Approach CORE DIMENSIONS SOCIOECONOMIC HOST COMMUNITIES MEDIUM-TERM PARTNERSHIPS OF WORLD BANK ASPECTS OF THE Host countries and host PERSPECTIVE GROUP’S DISPLACED communities face specific issues DEVELOPMENT Tailored approaches and special interventions to and require support. An influx of Institutions and policies to promote Broad partnerships with government, other address the specific vulnerabilities associated with the forcibly displaced poses a risk economic opportunities. partners, the private sector, and civil society, APPROACH forced displacement to reduce poverty among the especially in areas where the World Bank Group to progress made toward poverty forcibly displaced. reduction and shared prosperity. does not have a comparative advantage. SOCIAL FISCAL SECURITY COHESION STABILITY IMPACTS FORCIBLY DISPLACED PEOPLE & GOVERNMENT HOST COMMUNITIES • Increased access to services for forcibly displaced people • Increased awareness of the opportunities and vulnerabilities of forcibly displaced people • Increased resilience of host communities • Increased capacity at national and decentralized levels • Improved policies, plans, and programming for the forcibly displaced OUTCOMES • Improved economic opportunities • Improved self-reliance FINANCING & STRATEGIC A ANALYTICAL DIALOGUE OPERATIONS PARTNERSHIPS • Conduct analytical work with a • Balance support for the forcibly • Use analy analytical work to build • Leverag Leverage coordination mechanism medium-term perspective to inform displaced and host communities government awareness of the and platforms to improve policy dialogue, projects, and • Target vulnerabilities of forcibly vulnerabilities of forcibly displaced coherence of response and avoid programming that is context specific displaced people and impacted host communities duplication • Improve context specificity in • Mitigate the impact of forced • Encourage governments to • Crowd in resources to improve analytics, projects, policies, and displacement on host communities integrate forcibly displaced persons in predictability of financing for host programs • Complement other donor and development planning governments humanitarian agencies’ programs • Encourage governments to enact ACTIVITIES • Leverage the analytical work • Engage with partners to improve conducted by other donor and • Leverage sector expertise institutional changes and reforms reliability and quality of data humanitarian agencies • Focus on context-specific projects, that positively impact the forcibly • Engage with humanitarian and • Improve data to monitor and detect policies, and programs displaced development actors to learn the needs of and opportunities for • Build government awareness of the lessons the displaced and host communities limitation of current data and need • Engage with humanitarian and to improve quality and reliability development actors to catalyze the private sector INTERNAL INHIBITING OR ENABLING FACTORS: Country Management Unit buy-in and engagement, expertise, time and personnel to build strategic partnerships, country engagement model Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group EXTERNAL INHIBITING OR ENABLING FACTORS : POLITICAL ECONOMY, global and regional platforms and coordination mechanisms, stability of context, social and economic context, government capacity, data 7 dialogue and partnerships are leveraged to emphasize institutions and reforms. Next, the evaluation discusses internal and external factors that are potential impediments to the Bank Group’s development approach. Finally, the evaluation provides a series of conclusions and recommendations for the Bank Group to more fully leverage its comparative advantages to realize its development approach. 1  o read frequently asked questions and answers about forced displacement, visit http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/ T fragilityconflictviolence/brief/forced-displacement-a-growing-global-crisis-faqs. 2 A  protracted displacement situation is when 25,000 or more refugees of the same nationality live away from their home country for five or more years (UNHCR 2017a). 3 This focus of the evaluation is on conflict-induced forced displacement. This definition omits the evaluation of World Bank Group support to displacement caused by nonconflict factors such as climate change, natural disasters, disease pandemics, economic deprivation, or food insecurity. It is important to recognize these factors and the complex interrelationship between them and the mixed migration that often results from a combination of drought, food insecurity, and conflict. Internal and external interviewees see a risk of fragmentation in the World Bank Group’s efforts if certain units address conflict-induced forced displacement, others address climate-induced displacement, and still others address migration. In contrast, in recent months many Bank Group partners have had a coordinated approach for migration and displacement. 4  he evaluation includes partial FY18 data comprising projects in case study countries; projects funded by concessional T financing through the Global Concessional Financing Facility or incentivized financing through the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18) Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities; or projects that were flagged owing to innovative implementation arrangements. A total of 18 projects approved in FY18 were included in the analysis. These data were not included when discussing overall trends in country strategies, Advisory Services and Analytics, or financing (see chapter 2) given the incompleteness of the data. 5  he 12 countries are Azerbaijan, Colombia, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, T Turkey, and Uganda. 8 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 1 2 highlights The World Bank Group’s country strategies reveal limited engagement in countries with large forcibly displaced populations but show an evolution consistent with growing awareness Evolution in and understanding of the effects of forced Country displacement. Strategies, Advisory Advisory Services and Analytics have shifted Services and from providing a rationale for Bank Group Analytics, and engagement in forced displacement issues to Financing context-specific needs assessments focused on evidence-based, medium-term solutions. The evidence generated on context specificity and medium-term solutions should be further leveraged to inform policy dialogue, project design, and programming. This is especially true for gender analyses. The World Bank uses data collected by various humanitarian agencies and conducts joint analytical work. Wherever possible, and where the benefits of conducting joint analytical work and using others’ data outweigh the transaction costs, the World Bank could further leverage the analytical work and data of other agencies. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 9 The World Bank successfully mobilized new financing to support situations involving forced displacement and also crowded-in funding from other donors. Innovative financing mechanisms such as the Global Concessional Financing Facility and the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities in the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association have incentivized host countries to borrow to support refugees in middle-income and International Development Association countries, respectively. World Bank financial support is shifting from supporting internally displaced persons to supporting internally displaced persons and refugees and their host communities. World Bank support has generally focused on priority sectors to generate economic opportunities. However, while considering political economy factors, projects could be further tailored to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the displaced and their host communities, especially the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the women and children among them. Forced displacement projects need more specific indicators to monitor and evaluate effects on displaced populations. The International Finance Corporation’s support to forcibly displaced populations and affected host communities is small and constrained both by supply and demand factors. Its advisory services have been used to identify possible private sector entry points to support situations of forced displacement. 10 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 T H I S C H A P T E R assesses the extent to which the Bank Group’s country strategies, analytical work, and financing have evolved between FY00 and FY18. The theory of change is used as a tool to benchmark the Bank Group’s FY16–18 portfolio against its stated development approach. The analysis of the portfolio prior to FY16 focuses on deriving trends and lessons relevant to the subsequent development and application of the development approach. Aggregate trends in the Bank Group’s country strategies, analytical work, and financing are presented for FY00–17; FY18 data were incomplete at the time of the evaluation. When possible and relevant, the analysis distinguishes between three time periods: FY00–09, FY10–15, and FY16–18. Country Strategies Bank Group country strategies reveal limited but evolving engagement in countries with large forcibly displaced populations.1 The trend in Bank Group support to client countries is consistent with its growing awareness and understanding of the effects of forced displacement on forcibly displaced people and host communities. The review of country-level strategies shows an appreciable development in how the Bank Group includes, understands, and addresses the needs of these populations. What was once viewed as a more isolated and temporary impediment to development has begun to be assessed and understood more holistically. The Bank Group engaged in 27 of 60 Bank Group client countries with large forcibly displaced populations in support of refugees, IDPs, or returnees during fiscal years FY00–17 (figure 2.1). (A complete list is provided in appendix B.) Engagement ranged from emerging to consistent support. Box 2.1 provides examples of how the World Bank has supported IDPs, illustrating its changing understanding of forced displacement issues in Iraq and a missed opportunity in Kenya. Support to refugees varies across country strategies. It has been mentioned only recently in countries such as Afghanistan, Cameroon, Chad, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey. This reflects the timing of crises (in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey), the timing of country strategies (or the absence of a recent strategy), and the recent shift toward a development approach. In other cases, for example in Bangladesh and Central African Republic, the Bank Group has not addressed forced displacement in its country strategies. In some countries with large forcibly displaced populations, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran or the República Bolivariana de Venezuela, the Bank Group has had limited engagement in FY00–17. Country strategies illustrate the Bank Group’s long-standing support for IDPs, its increasing awareness of the need to support a development response in situations of forced displacement, and how this builds on previous experience. For example, in Azerbaijan, the Country Partnership Strategy for FY11–14 notes that previous IDP assistance (FY07–10) focused on improving living conditions and providing financial and in-kind subsidies to cover basic needs. Although it notes the need to provide Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 11 FIGURE 2.1  orld Bank Group Engagement in Countries with Large Forcibly |W Displaced Populations at the Country Strategy Level, FY00–17 8 returnees 11 17 IN 27 COUNTRIES AND refugees refugee host FOR 33 COUNTRIES FOR 41 GROUPS countries with large forcibly forced displacement displaced populations, was addressed. there is limited or no In all cases, the World reference to forced Bank Group engaged 22 displacement in country IDPs with groups of forcibly strategy documentation. displaced people through operations or advisory 11 services or both. refugee and IDP 5 host countries IDP host countries Note: IDP = internally displaced person. The Bank Group has 60 country clients with large forcibly displaced populations. The number of countries that referenced and addressed forced displacement in country strategies (n = 27) is less than the number of groups referenced or addressed in country strategies (n = 41). More than one group can be addressed in any given strategy. For example, the Country Partnership Framework for Chad (FY17–22) addresses both IDPs and refugees. FY18 data are partial and are not presented in the chart. training and opportunities to facilitate active labor market participation of IDPs to build self-reliance, the strategy remained focused on providing access to services. The new strategy (FY16–20) focused on integrating IDPs into society and creating opportunities for self-reliance. Country strategies for the Democratic Republic of Congo show the evolution of the Bank Group’s approach and support to situations of forced displacement. The FY08–11 Country Assistance Strategy targeted IDPs as one of four categories of vulnerable persons; the FY13–16 country strategy recognized the specific vulnerabilities of IDPs and returnees and the effect of forced displacement on host communities. In Jordan, the country strategy approved before the Syrian refugee crisis (FY12–15) made no mention of refugees. The FY12–15 strategy progress report provided a strategic course correction to mitigate the impact of the crisis on Jordanians and maintain social cohesion (World Bank Group 2014a). Jordan’s FY17–22 strategy shows the evolution to fully capturing the development approach to forced displacement. World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Since FY16, the World Bank has significantly increased the number of analytical reports related to conflict-induced forced displacement (figure 2.2). Evidence suggests the World Bank has a comparative advantage in analytical work and is viewed as a leader in the field. Between FY03 and FY17, 122 analytical reports were completed (appendix C).2 Of these, 110 were completed between 12 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 World Bank Support to Internally Displaced Persons Box 2.1 |  Iraq: Between fiscal year (FY)03 (when the World Bank reengaged in Iraq) and FY16, World Bank projects in Iraq supported internally displaced persons (IDPs) indirectly. Projects focused on reconstruction and rehabilitation. Older projects in education and social protection that were meant to benefit the entire population may or may not have reached IDPs. By contrast, IDPs are the targeted beneficiaries in the Promoting the Inclusion of Conflict-Affected Iraqi Youth Project (FY17). Moreover, the Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project (FY18) supports cash-for-work programs for vulnerable Iraqis, including IDPs and returnees. It also improves the government’s existing social safety net system—which uses proxy means testing and a unified registry—by scaling-up and extending coverage to IDPs and returnees and the vulnerable in recently liberated areas. Kenya: The World Bank had no operations designed to benefit IDPs in Kenya between FY00 and FY17. Because projects did not target IDPs, they may or may not have benefited from infrastructure, education, health services, and youth development projects. IDPs are more likely to have benefited from interventions focused on a particular geographical area, such as the Rift Valley in Nyanza, where IDPs have settled in large numbers (about 620,000 people). However, targeting even these areas would not guarantee that IDPs would benefit because IDPs frequently change locations, and government agencies do not monitor them. The National Safety Net Program-for-Results (FY13–20) provides financing for poor and vulnerable households but not specifically for IDPs. Note: Indirect support is defined as support that does not directly target refugees, IDPs, returnees, or host communities affected by forced displacement. Indirect and direct support was determined based on a review of the project development objectives, the list of targeted beneficiaries, and project components or subcomponents (for more information see appendix A). FY09 and FY17, 59 of which were completed in FY16–17 alone. Analysis of the analytical work indicates adequate coverage of IDPs, refugees, and the regional dimensions of forced displacement, but recent reports focus more on refugees. Little work has been conducted on the circumstances of returnees.3 The distribution of analytical work is consistent with the World Bank’s role in producing globally relevant knowledge on issues of forced displacement (n = 48) and the scale of displacement in the respective Regions.4 Most analytical work was completed in three Regions: Africa (n = 26), Middle East and North Africa (n = 17), and Europe and Central Asia (n = 17). The remaining three Regions (South Asia, East Asia and Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean) completed only 14. The number of World Bank analytical products increased in FY09–15 and work began to highlight the development impacts of forced displacement and the need for a development response.5 The Global Program on Forced Displacement was established in 2009 with the goal to raise awareness of the Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 13 FIGURE 2.2 Advisory Services and Analytics by Completion Year, FY03–17 | 40 35 30 25 ASA (no.) 20 15 10 5 0 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Source: World Bank ImageBank, World Bank Operations Portal, and www.knomad.org. Note: ASA = Advisory Services and Analytics; FY = fiscal year. The approval fiscal year is not available for all reports, but the completion fiscal year is available for all reports. FY18 data are partial and are not presented in the chart. development impact of conflict-induced forced displacement. Reports produced between FY09 and FY15 helped raise awareness of the need for a development approach to forced displacement within the Bank Group and beyond. Internal interviews noted the important role these early reports played in building interest in the topic among staff. Between FY09 and FY15, analytical work also evolved from providing a rationale for a development response to assessing the context-specific, medium-term needs of IDPs, refugees, and host communities, consistent with a development approach. For instance, the reports focusing on IDPs analyzed the specific constraints they face in different contexts, such as land tenure (Syria and Uganda), social protection (the Central African Republic and South Sudan), and livelihoods (Georgia, Indonesia, and South Sudan). Work from FY16–18 focused on understanding implementation challenges and solutions in a forced displacement context. For example, The Welfare of Syrian Refugees: Evidence from Jordan and Lebanon found that food and cash assistance reduces poverty among refugees but is unsustainable (Verme et al. 2016). The report recommends policies to facilitate refugee self-reliance through access to labor markets and economic inclusion. The World Bank is also concentrating its recent analytical efforts on areas with scarce information, such as effective strategies for targeting refugees, facilitating the voluntary return of refugees to their home countries, generating data, and the economics of return. These situational analyses need to be leveraged better within World Bank operations, as evidenced later in this chapter. Box 2.2 highlights positive examples of influential analytical work that has been used to support policy dialogue and reform. 14 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 World Bank Analytical Work: Shifting the Discourse on Refugees Box 2.2 |  The World Bank adds real value by conducting medium-term, socioeconomic analyses that other development and humanitarian actors do not generally undertake. External experts and stakeholders believe the World Bank’s analytical work helped shift international discourse on refugees by providing evidence of positive and negative effects on host communities. For example, research on the impact of refugees on the Turkish labor market found significant displacement of Turkish nationals in the informal sector but found a positive effect on formal employment for Turkish workers (on average). The winners were typically Turkish men with low levels of educational attainment who upgraded from informal to formal employment. Women and high-skilled men did not benefit from the increased supply of informal workers (Del Carpio and Wagner 2015). In Kenya, a social and economic assessment showed that the presence of refugees in the Kakuma refugee camp in Turkana boosted local income and employment levels in and around the camp, particularly for women and agricultural workers. However, wage earners and animal-selling households did not fare as well. A decampment policy, if implemented, would reduce the local economy (Sanghi, Onder, and Vemuru 2016). In both Kenya and Turkey, the heterogeneity of effects suggests the need to ensure that the most vulnerable in host communities benefit from interventions and policies. Both studies facilitated policy dialogue and reform. The findings from “Yes” In My Backyard?—a study conducted jointly by the World Bank and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees—facilitated policy dialogue with the Turkana County government related to a new settlement. The new settlement, Kalobeyei, will integrate refugees into the host community. The findings from Del Carpio and Wagner (2015) were used to promote labor market policies that subsidize and incentivize Turkish employment in the formal labor market to ensure that host communities benefit. Sources: Del Carpio and Wagner 2015; Sanghi, Onder, and Vemuru 2016. Recent World Bank and IFC analytical work provided the rationale for private sector support to situations of forced displacement (IFC 2018; World Bank 2017a). An IFC study showed the existence of a vibrant, informal market and private sector within a refugee camp, indicating the potential for private investment and jobs and opportunities for refugees (IFC 2018). A separate IFC stocktaking exercise of existing private sector refugee initiatives generated knowledge and data on how the private sector has engaged in refugee issues and where gaps and opportunities exist for private sector engagement. Ultimately, forced displacement is a nascent area for the private sector with significant policy and regulatory constraints, limited understanding of refugee needs (as customers) Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 15 and evidence of impact, and reputational and financial risks for both IFC and its clients (IFC 2018). Notably, both studies address an information gap regarding opportunities that may exist in engaging with refugee populations, and dissemination has increased private sector awareness of the investment opportunities. Coordinating and Leveraging the Analytical Work of Partners One-third of the Bank Group’s analytical work is performed jointly with partners and, in some cases, governments. For example, in 2013, the World Bank—together with UNHCR—worked with the government of Lebanon to prepare the Roadmap for Priority Interventions for Stabilization from the Syrian Conflict: Strategy to Mitigate the Impact of the Syrian Conflict (World Bank and United Nations 2013). The road map identified strategic objectives to stabilize the economy from the impact of the refugee influx. World Bank staff also reported interviewing humanitarian actors and others as an initial step in conducting analytical work to quickly understand the country context and sectors affected by forced displacement. The World Bank used data collected by UNHCR, the WFP, and from the Social Cohesion and Reconciliation Index of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).6 However, staff noted that it was sometimes difficult to obtain data from other organizations in some countries. Relying solely on UNHCR and WFP survey data is restrictive because of constraints the agencies face, which limit the scope of the data collected by them. The World Bank is working to improve data on the forcibly displaced and host communities. The World Bank’s comparative advantage is in collecting host community data and comparator population characteristics to use in its analytical work. Recent initiatives are moving in that direction; for example, in 2017, the Bank Group and UNHCR established a joint data center on forced displacement. When operational, the center will collect reliable and accessible data on forcibly displaced persons and host communities, building on the comparative advantages of both institutions—UNHCR’s capacity for collecting refugee data and the Bank Group’s expertise in analytical work and statistical capacity building. The joint venture will facilitate a development approach by ensuring data-driven responses to forced displacement. Currently, the capabilities of each organization’s data systems are being reviewed (UNHCR 2018b). The World Bank is also working with the United Nations (UN) Intersecretariat Working Group on Household Surveys and the UN Statistical Commission’s Expert Group on Refugee Statistics to integrate IDPs and refugees into household surveys. Notwithstanding some of the limitations of scope, the World Bank could further seize opportunities to leverage other partners’ analytical work and country assessments to free up additional resources for analyses with a medium-term perspective. This is particularly needed given the difficulty of mobilizing resources to undertake comprehensive studies. For instance, both Jordan and Lebanon have well-established vulnerability assessment frameworks and conduct needs assessments in conjunction with UNDP and UNHCR in Jordan, and with UNHCR, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and WFP in Lebanon. Although these analyses and data prioritize refugees, they can be the foundation for World Bank situational analyses. For example, Lebanon’s assessment was used in The Welfare of Syrian Refugees: Evidence from Jordan and Lebanon (Verme et al. 2016). 16 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 Financial Support Three notable shifts occurred in World Bank financial support for forcibly displaced populations and their host communities between FY00 and FY18. First, operations became more direct. Second, support (recently) shifted to refugees. Finally, support became balanced to target both displaced and host communities. The first shift illustrates the World Bank’s movement from its initial entry point, which focused on reconstruction and rehabilitation in postconflict countries with large conflict- affected populations, including IDPs and returnees.7 This support may or may not have benefited IDPs and returnees but did not target them directly. The projects were, therefore, not designed to address the specific vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced. The second and third shifts represent the World Bank’s response to the growing global refugee crisis and a movement toward a development approach to forced displacement. These shifts broadly coincide with three distinct time frames. Between FY00 and FY09, operations focused on IDPs and returnees by providing agricultural support, basic social and economic infrastructure, delivery of services, housing, and social protection to facilitate return. A transition period coinciding with the onset of the Syrian refugee crisis is evident between FY10 and FY15, when there was a mix of traditional support to IDPs and returnees; a movement toward balanced support for IDPs, returnees, and their host communities; and support for refugee host communities. Beginning in FY16, the World Bank increased balanced support to refugees and refugee-hosting communities and continued to do the same for IDPs, returnees, and their host communities. World Bank commitments for forcibly displaced populations and host communities have been flat for most of the period reviewed, but they increased significantly in FY16 and FY17. Multidonor trust fund, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), and International Development Association (IDA) commitments to operations supporting forcibly displaced people and host communities increased from $178 million in FY00 (in real terms) to $2.7 billion in FY17 (figure 2.3).8 Seventy-five percent of FY17 lending was to Afghanistan, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Nigeria, and Turkey. Support for forcibly displaced populations and affected host communities represents 1 percent of total IBRD and IDA commitments made between FY00 and FY17 and 3 percent of commitments made to the 41 countries receiving direct support for forcibly displaced populations and affected host communities in the same period. Between FY00 and FY17, the World Bank approved 99 projects in 41 countries and 4 regional projects in the Africa Region.9 The number of projects approved increased from an average of 5 per year from FY00 to FY15 to 16 per year from FY16 to FY17. (A complete list of projects is provided in appendix D.) The growth in commitments reflects increased attention and support for refugees and host communities. Twenty-seven projects were approved between FY16 and FY17, and roughly half the projects supported refugees and refugee-hosting communities. Two-thirds of financing between FY16 and FY17 supported refugees or host communities or both. IFC has had little engagement with forcibly displaced populations and affected host communities. IFC’s portfolio consists of investments in (i) microfinance institutions in Lebanon (2), one which provides access to finance to Lebanese-owned micro, small, and medium enterprises with a focus Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 17 FIGURE 2.3  orld Bank Commitments for Situations of Conflict-Induced |W Forced Displacement by Approval Year, FY00–17 3,000 2,500 Commitments ($, millions) 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 IBRD/IDA Trust Funds and GCFF Cofinancing Total Source: World Bank Business Warehouse database. Note: GCFF = Global Concessional Financing Facility; IBRD = International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; IDA = International Development Association. FY18 data are partial and are not presented in the chart. on youth, women, low-income individuals, and another which focuses on providing access to finance to both Lebanese and Syrian refugees; (ii) vocational training in Jordan (1), which provides training, transportation, and scholarships to Jordanian and Syrian students; and (iii) a company producing innovative iris-scanning technology (under preparation) in Jordan (1) that helps refugees without a bank account to pay for goods and services. Overall, this is an emerging area of focus for IFC. Knowledge gained from the innovative analytical work has not yet been converted into a pipeline of viable investments, likely because of existing knowledge gaps and policy and regulatory barriers identified in the analytical work. On the supply side, IFC’s work in fragile and high-risk environments requires adapted instruments, such as financing mechanisms to support small, upstream ventures; blended finance; and traditional financing for larger-scale investors. Relevant lessons from IFC’s support to fragile and conflict- affected states that apply to this context include the need for IFC to adapt its business model, instrument mix, risk tolerances, and staff incentives to be effective in these high-risk environments (World Bank 2014b). Currently, IFC (and other private sector development institutions) lack access to concessional financing for middle-income countries to derisk investments and attract private sector participation. Balancing Financing for Forcibly Displaced and Host Communities World Bank support to IDPs and refugees has become more balanced, with interventions that target both displaced and host communities—consistent with the Bank Group’s movement toward a development approach. Balanced support is meant to help mitigate the harmful effects of forced displacement on host communities (for example, fiscal strain and social tensions) and address the 18 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 specific vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced (for example, freedom of movement and the right to work and own assets), which can stimulate the positive impacts forced displacement can have on local economies. Balanced support is expected to be the most effective way to create cobenefits and create political will within the government, making support for the forcibly displaced a win-win proposition. The number of projects providing balanced support has significantly increased over time. Five of 38 projects supported both IDPs and their host communities between FY00 and FY09. Since FY16, 10 of 13 projects supported both IDPs and their host communities (figure 2.4).10 Refugee projects also increasingly provide balanced support to both host communities and refugees. Six of 18 projects supported both refugees and their host communities between FY00 and FY09. Since FY16, 9 of 14 projects supported both refugees and their host communities (figure 2.5). Concessional financing, the availability of IDA financing on exceptional terms, and grant money from the Facility for Refugees in Turkey have likely contributed to the shift to balanced support. In FY10–15, the World Bank stepped up its support to refugee host communities. Lessons from previous projects found that host communities are often worse off than the forcibly displaced or perceive that refugees disproportionately benefit from assistance (for example, government or humanitarian). Targeting only the forcibly displaced can create social tension. Projects approved after FY11 incorporated lessons learned from past projects and the 2011 World Development Report, which suggest that it is necessary to provide early, tangible results (“quick wins”) to build confidence in the state’s ability to respond to challenging circumstances (World Bank 2011). Initial engagements in Jordan and Lebanon incorporated these lessons and focused on mitigating FIGURE 2.4 Projects Directly Supporting IDPs and IDP Host Communities by | Approval Year, FY00–17 8 7 6 5 Projects (no.) 4 3 2 1 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 IDP IDP and host community Source: World Bank Business Warehouse database. Note: IDP = internally displaced person. Projects targeting IDPs may also target refugees and returnees or both. FY18 data are partial and are not presented in the chart. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 19 the impact of the Syrian refugee crisis on host communities. These projects were designed to provide fast, visible results to host communities to prevent social unrest and increase trust in the government. For example, in FY14, the Emergency Project to Assist Jordan to Partially Mitigate the Impact of Syrian Conflict helped the government of Jordan maintain health use rates and financed subsidies on necessities, which visibly affected the daily lives of Jordanians (World Bank 2013a, 2015a). In FY15, the Emergency Primary Health Care Restoration Project provided support to Lebanese host communities affected by the Syrian refugee crisis. In FY14, to reduce social tension in municipalities with high concentrations of Syrian refugees, both Jordan and Lebanon approved participatory, municipal-based projects that benefited both refugees and host communities. The projects’ participatory approach was designed to enhance social cohesion and reduce social tensions. An evaluation of the Jordan project found improvement in solid waste management and infrastructure, especially roads (areas under the municipalities’ control). The livelihoods of women in one municipality improved from this investment (World Bank and IMPACT Initiatives 2017). Between FY16 and FY18, the majority of World Bank projects supported both the forcibly displaced and host communities. By FY16, projects in Jordan targeted both refugees and host communities and projects were anchored in the medium term. Projects supported legal aid, youth social services, economic opportunities, health, and water and energy reforms. In Lebanon, the political economy surrounding Syrian refugees—who make up at least 17 percent of Lebanon’s population—is more complex. Between FY16 and FY18, projects in Lebanon gradually became more balanced, FIGURE 2.5  rojects Supporting Refugees, Refugees and Host Communities, |P and Host Communities by Approval, FY00–17 12 10 Refugees and IDPs (millions) 8 6 4 2 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY07 FY08 FY11 FY12 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Refugee Refugee and host community Host community only Source: World Bank Business Warehouse database. Note: Projects targeting refugees may also target internally displaced persons and returnees or both. FY18 data are partial and are not presented in the chart. Host community projects in FY16–17 are in Kenya (n = 2), and Lebanon (n = 2). Host community projects before FY16 were in Afghanistan (n = 1), Guinea (n = 1), Jordan (n = 1), Lebanon (n = 2), and Rwanda (n = 1). 20 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 supporting economic opportunities, education, roads, and transportation. There is scope, however, to ensure refugees benefit more directly from projects and projects are designed to promote medium-term solutions for host communities and refugees alike. Failing to address refugee-specific or IDP-specific vulnerabilities and host community needs can reduce the effectiveness of the institution’s intended development approach. When countries host large numbers of refugees, it is necessary to mitigate the protracted negative fiscal, economic, and social development effects of the refugees on host governments. However, an important role for the Bank Group and other development partners is also to identify and address the specific longer-term vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced to help countries achieve sustainable medium-term solutions. Interviews with external stakeholders confirm this important role for the Bank Group. Mobilizing Financing The World Bank’s leadership and expertise crowds in resources from other donors through its project interventions. For example, in Afghanistan, the World Bank leveraged donor financing ($143 million) through a strategic framework for rural access that garnered support from various international agencies for labor-based infrastructure projects. The World Bank leveraged about $84 million from the European Commission, Belgium, Denmark, and Italy, and future funding from France, Germany, and the Netherlands for municipal development in the West Bank and Gaza. The World Bank also leveraged about $81 million for municipal services in Jordan through a project-specific multidonor trust fund. Other examples include crowding in resources in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Sierra Leone, and in a regional Africa project. The World Bank has worked with diverse partners to mobilize resources for programming for the forcibly displaced through multidonor trust funds. Multidonor trust funds are an important aspect of the development approach; they provide a platform for donor coordination and predictable financing to facilitate burden sharing with refugee host nations. The World Bank has brought in donor support through numerous multidonor trust funds for at least 25 years—in 1993 the World Bank established the West Bank and Gaza Trust Fund using surplus funds and donor commitments. Forced displacement is one of five focus areas of the State and Peacebuilding multidonor trust fund (established in 2009).11 This fund has supported analytical work on forced displacement, early interventions in Jordan, implementation of a development approach to forced displacement, and a strategic platform to operationalize the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window. The World Bank established the Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund at a time of growing demand for public services when the government was already in a stressed fiscal position. The Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund has helped to mitigate the impact of Syrian refugees on host communities (World Bank 2014c, 2016d; World Bank and United Nations 2013).12 The International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq designed by the World Bank and UN and approved in 2003 combines resources and coordinates humanitarian and development support allowing each organization to focus on its comparative advantage.13 The World Bank helped establish two new financing mechanisms to increase international support for refugees and refugee-hosting communities. The Global Concessional Financing Facility (GCFF), established in September 2016, aims to mobilize funding for middle-income countries; the IDA18 Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 21 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities, established in January 2017 (effective as of July 1, 2017), provides support to IDA-eligible countries (box 2.3).14 These instruments recognize that countries hosting large numbers of refugees are providing a global public good and provide incentives to host country governments to borrow to address the development challenges resulting from forced displacement. An important lesson from an evaluation of World Bank support in Jordan and Lebanon was that new financing mechanisms were needed to support countries experiencing a large influx of refugees. Fiscal stress and the sensitivities surrounding the issue of taking on debt for nonnationals, make governments reluctant to borrow from the World Bank. The evaluation concluded that trust funds were insufficient given the estimated needs of host communities and refugees (World Bank 2016c). Interviews with country stakeholders supporting the GCFF, in-country donor organizations, and from IEG’s assessment of GCFF-funded project designs suggest continuous attention is needed to ensure that refugees directly benefit from concessional financing projects and projects support medium- term solutions for self-reliance (bridging the humanitarian-development divide). Projects receiving concessional finance through the GCFF are required to benefit both refugees and host communities. External stakeholders believe that shared benefits are a critical condition for receiving concessional resources. To achieve this, project design needs to account for—as best as possible—political economy realities. Examples of working within policy constraints include the design and intent of the Lebanon Roads and Employment Project, which focuses on short-term, labor-intensive employment for refugees; the Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program, where refugee employment is constrained to sectors where they are legally entitled to work (World Bank 2018a, 3); and the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for- Results, where continuous policy dialogue is pushing reforms in a sensitive area, achieving incremental policy reforms to remove barriers to Syrian employment (for example, opening up restricted sectors).15 The need for a more comprehensive results framework for the GCFF has been acknowledged and a strategic partnership between the GCFF, UNHCR, and others plans to address the issue. Continued donor support is required to unlock concessional financing and donors are beginning to push for more clearly defined and monitorable outcomes that demonstrate intended development impacts for Syrian refugees. For example, in Jordan, the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results provides direct support for policies related to work permits, formalizing home-based businesses, trade and investment climate reforms, and investment promotion, which are designed to improve employment opportunities and economic growth. The Education Reform Support Program-for-Results and the Emergency Health Project provide targeted support to both poor Jordanians and Syrian refugees. In Lebanon, donors and IEG concluded that refugees would not sufficiently benefit from expanded access to health facilities supported through the GCFF- funded Lebanon Health Resilience Project. World Bank finance increased access to and availability of services and service provision for poor Lebanese; Syrian refugees would benefit through UNHCR financing. The project was designed to monitor use by both Syrian refugees and poor Lebanese. The GCFF Secretariat and Steering Committee must further leverage the GCFF’s platform to coordinate financing for host countries. Coordination requires information on GCFF financing and alignment of donors’ priorities at the country level. Internal and external interviews suggest 22 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2  he Global Concessional Financing Facility and the IDA18 Regional Box 2.3 | T Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities: Underpinning the Development Approach The Global Concessional Financing Facility (GCFF) is a partnership sponsored by the World Bank, the United Nations, and the Islamic Development Bank Group to mobilize the international community to address the financing needs of middle-income countries hosting large numbers of refugees. The GCFF’s goals are to bring humanitarian and development organizations together, to bridge the gap between humanitarian and development assistance for medium-term solutions, and to ensure a coordinated international response to refugee crises through projects that support a country’s development agenda and have the clear objective of supporting both refugees and host communities (World Bank Group 2017b, 4). The GCFF is designed with an inclusive governance structure and consensus-based decision-making process to provide an open platform to enhance coordination between benefiting countries, supporting countries, United Nations agencies, and participating multilateral development banks. By combining donor contributions with loans from multilateral development banks, the GCFF eases International Bank for Reconstruction and Development terms and mobilizes roughly $4 in loans for every $1 of concessional grants provided to eligible middle-income countries. The GCFF’s target is to raise $1.5 billion in grant contributions over a five-year period to mobilize an estimated $4.5–6 billion in concessional financing. Since its inception in September 2016, the GCFF has provided $494 million in concessional financing to 11 underlying operations in Jordan and Lebanon, mobilizing $2 billion in support for forcibly displaced people and host communities.a In FY17–18, World Bank projects in Jordan and Lebanon received $463 million in concessional financing from the GCFF, which mobilized $1.9 billion International Bank for Reconstruction and Development loans supporting nine underlying operations implemented by the World Bank.b As part of the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA18), the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities (IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window) was established and an additional $2 billion in IDA resources were dedicated to assist eligible refugee-hosting countries. The IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window mobilizes funding for eligible IDA countries by “topping off” their IDA allocations. Projects funded through the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window support “medium to longer term development needs of refugees and host communities” (World Bank 2017b, 115). As of November 2018, 14 countries were assessed as eligible: Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Niger, Pakistan, Rwanda, and Uganda. Source: World Bank 2017b; World Bank Group 2017b. a. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Islamic Development Bank Group, and World Bank have GCFF-financed projects approved in Jordan and Lebanon. b. One project also received an International Development Association credit. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 23 coordination will not only occur at the GCFF steering committee level—information must reach staff in the field. The World Bank has recently initiated mapping exercises in Jordan and Lebanon to ensure coordination and avoid duplication. Coordination and program coherence are also driven by strong country ownership and political commitment to reform. In Jordan, donors have coalesced around the implementation of the Jordan Compact through concessional financing and trade agreements. It is too early to know whether the intentions of the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window will materialize, but the design of the first wave of projects is promising. Project documents from Cameroon, Ethiopia, and Uganda describe projects designed to support a balanced approach to secure livelihoods, promote socioeconomic inclusion, and ensure access to services and basic infrastructure, building on lessons from prior engagements.16 As with GCFF-financed projects, a country’s political economy is a critical element of effective design. The Cameroon projects extend service provision to refugee- hosting communities through ongoing projects and provide targeted services to refugees (box 2.4). Uganda has extended municipal services to refugee-hosting communities and focused on a major structural challenge—water scarcity—exacerbated by the influx of refugees. In Ethiopia, IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window funding directly targets refugees, which is an evolution from the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project in the Horn of Africa, which targeted refugee-hosting communities and likely benefited refugees indirectly. The design of the Ethiopia Economic Opportunities Program includes the integration of refugees into the government’s industrialization program to provide employment to refugees. Lessons learned from the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results were taken into consideration, acknowledging the need for continuous policy dialogue and incremental reforms. However, the design relies on the government acting on the nine pledges it made in 2016.17 Early implementation of the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window has identified some initial issues with the allocation processes. First, Uganda’s allocation under the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window was calculated based on refugee numbers as of December 2016 (940,835). The country was informed of its notional allocation in September 2017. By January 2018, the refugee population in Uganda had increased to 1,395,146. Interviews in the field suggested the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window allocation was insufficient and relatively marginal in the changed conditions. Second, task team leaders noted difficulties in planning, given the lapse of time before the amount was confirmed. Contextualizing and Coordinating to Achieve Results The Bank Group’s overall objective to help reduce poverty among the forcibly displaced and host communities through targeted, coordinated, and contextualized interventions is at the core of the development approach. These interventions aim to reduce vulnerabilities for the forcibly displaced, help manage changes for host communities, and contribute to durable solutions. Working in partnership and coordinating with other actors is critical to the development approach to reduce cross-sector overlaps and avoid duplication and improve synergies and complementarities. Mapping the World Bank Support The World Bank’s support has focused largely on small-scale infrastructure, access to services (health, housing, and water and sanitation), agriculture, public works, and social protection, reflecting traditional 24 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2  he 18th Replenishment of IDA and the Regional Sub-Window for Box 2.4 | T Refugees and Host Communities Program in Cameroon Cameroon hosts about 290,000 refugees from the Central African Republic in its eastern border areas and 86,000 refugees from Nigeria in its northern region. Both refugees and host communities have significant needs. Cameroon was the first country to receive financing through the 18th Replenishment of IDA under the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities. It has received $130 million to address key challenges faced by refugees and host communities. The approach adopted is to leverage four existing loans for health, education, safety nets, and community development to provide a multisectoral package implemented in the same target communities and monitored by local councils with participation from refugee camp representatives. Some common features include using a common targeting mechanism; monitoring the number of refugee beneficiaries; using community workers to provide human development, psychosocial, and social cohesion services; developing a single beneficiary database using existing national and project-level data, and data from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; and focusing on gender-sensitive interventions. Using resources from the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities, these operations support refugees through grants to refugee-affected schools and the design of a government strategy for schools hosting refugee children, fee waivers for health and nutrition services (including reproductive health and services for gender- based violence), employment from labor-intensive public works, and cash transfers. Most resources are directed to host communities to mitigate the impact on services caused by the influx of refugees. The government agreed to develop a national strategy and operational plan to strengthen its management of issues related to internally displaced persons and refugees, and to develop a policy for refugees’ access to land. It also will promote protection by issuing biometric identity documents for refugees and birth certificates for refugee children born in Cameroon. Note: IDA = International Development Association. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 25 areas of World Bank sector expertise (appendix E).18 Between FY00 and FY15, the World Bank provided short- and medium-term food security and livelihood support—through agriculture and agribusiness (in Angola, Central African Republic, and Ethiopia) for returning IDPs and refugees. Beginning in FY16, World Bank support began to emphasize medium-term support and economic opportunities for IDPs and refugees through vocational training, job skills training, policy reforms for employment creation, work permits, and home-based businesses (in Ethiopia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey for refugees). However, in some cases, the World Bank still provides short-term solutions such as labor-intensive public works and cash transfers for basic necessities.19 Community-driven development projects, which support small-scale infrastructure, are much more common in IDA than IBRD countries. A recent landscape of the financial support of key development and humanitarian actors in case study countries reveals gaps in medium-term support including social protection, private sector development, and to a lesser extent, education and skills. Figure 2.6 maps the financial support of key development and humanitarian actors to identify patterns and concentrations of support by type of sector and support at the country level. The map was created by examining the institutional mandate and areas of focus of key humanitarian and development partners for the 12 case study countries and triangulating with information gained from external interviews with main development and humanitarian agencies and international nongovernmental organizations. Although the findings cannot be generalized to other countries or more broadly (globally), they are illustrative. Appendix F provides details. The World Bank operates in areas both crowded (such as livelihoods, infrastructure, water, and health) and relatively open, such as community-driven development and cash transfers. In Iraq, the World Bank’s Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project supports IDPs and returnees. The operation uses labor-intensive public works and a social safety net program to include IDPs and returnees, for example, through registration, enrollment, eligibility verification, and payment delivery (World Bank 2018b). Through a community-driven development approach in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda, the World Bank is one of the few actors addressing the environmental degradation caused by the large influx of refugees. In some countries, projects are used to support institutional reforms that go beyond physical infrastructure, for example, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the World Bank sought to reconcile the water sector in the city of Mostar (World Bank 2006). In Jordan, with a 40 percent increase in demand for water in refugee-hosting communities, the World Bank is supporting reforms to the energy and water sectors to improve financial viability and increase efficiency gains (World Bank 2016e). At the same time, the World Bank may not be sufficiently seizing the space to engage in private sector development and education. World Bank staff need to be fully aware of the donor landscape in each country, including an adequately contextualized local-level landscape, and how the World Bank Group can best define and execute its role and comparative advantage. The mapping shows that humanitarian actors are actively involved in medium-term livelihood support. This suggests an area of overlap. Development partners, including the Bank Group, have a comparative advantage in medium-term solutions for self-reliance, poverty reduction, and economic growth, which must be made coherent. For example, the Jordan Compact galvanized development partners for medium-term solutions and coordinated efforts, 26 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 particularly those of the United States Agency for International Development and the U.K. Department for International Development (DFID). In Uganda, the World Bank recently entered into a strategic partnership with DFID, the Netherlands, and Norway. These platforms provide an opportunity to improve the coherence of the World Bank’s response. The evaluation has identified few cases of shared objectives and monitoring, suggesting an aspect that could be used in certain settings to realize joint outcomes. Responding to Specific Contexts Understanding the unique, multifaceted vulnerabilities of IDPs, refugees, and host communities is critical to contextualizing humanitarian and development interventions. Additionally, key informant interviews suggest that care should be taken not to exacerbate the vulnerabilities of the displaced; this requires an understanding of local political economy considerations and vulnerabilities specific to IDPs and refugees. Context specificity is not yet a consistent feature of project design. Many World Bank projects support livelihoods and economic opportunities, in line with the priorities of a development approach. Projects are beginning to focus on policies to ensure economic opportunities, but there are often restrictions on employment due to political economy factors. In some cases, refugees may not be eligible to work formally in host countries, or IDPs and refugees’ former livelihoods may not be available to them in their new locations. For example, many of Syria’s refugees fled from rural to urban areas, where their rural skills were not transferable. Lack of experience and skills and low educational attainment are also barriers to employment and livelihood support programs. Experience shows that livelihood programs are more effective for highly educated refugees with previous experience (Holzaepfel and Tadesse 2015, 11). A recent shift in the World Bank’s approach to creating economic opportunities is emerging. In Jordan, for example, the $300 million Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results Project supports labor market and investment climate reforms to allow Syrian refugees to work legally in the formal job sector and to encourage the formalization of home-based enterprises and facilitate trade, respectively. It also supports investment promotion through capacity building of the Jordan Investment Commission. In Lebanon, the Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program tackles similar issues—focusing on lagging regions— to foster private sector job creation through support for special economic zones, small- and medium- size enterprises, and agribusiness value chains, among others (World Bank 2018a). Although early in implementation, the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results Project has already been instrumental in supporting reforms, although design aspects and political sensitivities have resulted in slower than anticipated results. The government of Jordan’s commitment to reform, formalized in the Jordan Compact, has resulted in several policy changes related to economic opportunities for Syrians, including work permits (for example, waiving work permit fees for Syrian refugees or limiting work permits issued to other foreign nationals) and home- based business licensing.20 The World Bank’s project has promoted more flexible policies to create incentives to formalize businesses and labor. Policy dialogue with the government of Jordan has resulted Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 27 FIGURE 2.6  ocus and Response Areas for Key Partners |F STAGE IN PROCESS EMERGENCY RESPONSE MEDIUM-TERM SUPPORT UNHCR OCHA UNICEF WFP UNDP IOM ILO WHO EU DG ECHO- humanitarian DG DEVCO- development EBRD EIB FAO African Development Bank Islamic Development Bank Bilaterals- DFID, DFID: SIDA, SIDA: SIDA: JICA, JICA: USAID; USAID: GIZ; GIZ: KfW KfW: Norwegian Refugee Council Danish Refugee Council International Committee of the Red Cross coordination infrastructure psychosocial protection food cash transfers relief assistance cash transfers private sector development assistance livelihood waste education coordination relief and rehabilitation protection health shelter food security water emergency relief GBV Source: Independent Evaluation Group mapping. Note: DFID = U.K. Department for International Development; DG DEVCO = Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development; DG ECHO = Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations; EBRD = European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; EIB = European Investment Bank; EU = European Union; FAO = Food and Agricultural Organization (of the UN); GBV = gender-based violence; GIZ = German Agency for International Cooperation; ILO = International Labour Organization; IOM = International Organization for Migration; JICA = Japan International Cooperation Agency; KfW = German Development Bank; OCHA = United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs; SIDA = Swedish International Development Cooperation Authority; UNDP = United Nations Development Programme; UNHCR = United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; UNICEF = United Nations Children’s Fund; USAID = U.S. Agency for International Development; WFP = World Food Programme; WHO = World Health Organization. 28 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 in numerous incremental reforms to improve results and increase the number of work permits issued, but it has been challenging. To date, roughly 65,000 permits have been issued (cumulative total as of September 2018) against the project’s 130,000 target (December 2019). This number might overstate the actual number of Syrians receiving work permits; the work permit total includes renewals, for example. The project has yet to demonstrate improved economic opportunities for women; only 4 percent of work permits are issued to women. Syrian women are more likely to engage in home-based enterprises, which the project emphasizes. As of March 2018, only 42 of 233 formalized home-based businesses were owned by women; however, none were owned by Syrian women (World Bank 2018c). Although the project supports risk mitigation measures, it has not mitigated all refugee constraints and vulnerabilities that might deter formalizing labor. Formalization of labor and businesses, including home-based businesses, has been limited for a variety of reasons. Policy changes surrounding work permits have been incremental and have gradually expanded in scope and flexibility under difficult political economy constraints. Still, Syrian refugees remain uncertain whether obtaining a formal work permit will affect asylum status or refugee benefits even with the project’s information dissemination plan on eligibility, administrative process, and service standards for obtaining work permits and Ministry of the Interior identification cards. A planned awareness raising campaign for formalizing home-based businesses has not yet been implemented. Other external factors affecting project implementation include slow implementation of the EU trade program (which may create jobs), the cost of transportation to work in special economic zones, a lack of or limited childcare for working mothers, and a lack of programs to increase workers’ skills. In some countries, the World Bank is targeting education for forcibly displaced young people and the education systems of host communities that are strained by an influx of forcibly displaced individuals. Forced displacement interventions require strong support to children and youth. In 2017, UNHCR data reported that more than 52 percent of the world’s refugees were children, an increase from 41 percent in 2009. Their needs include education, skills development, and critical services, such as health and psychosocial support to address trauma. Educating the next generation is central to creating a stable public and private sector in the countries of origin, as noted by the 2011 World Development Report (World Bank 2011). The small number of education operations (n = 7) highlights the limited role of the Education Global Practice in directly supporting the educational needs of those forcibly displaced. This needs to be an area for increased attention moving forward.21 In 2014, UNICEF, UNHCR, Save the Children, World Vision, and bilateral donors pledged support to educate Syrian refugees in Jordan and urged other partners and the government to focus attention on children under a No Lost Generation strategy.22 The governments of Jordan and Lebanon provide free access to public education for refugee children and have expanded access to education to accommodate Syrian refugees. The World Bank is supporting the education of Jordanian, Lebanese, and Syrian children in coordination with UNICEF and other donor and humanitarian actors (World Bank 2016f, 2017c). Refugee enrollment rates remain low, even when host countries grant access to schools (as in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey). In Jordan, interviews with staff and government stakeholders suggest that not integrating Syrian refugee students and child labor keep boys from Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 29 attending school. Safety concerns and early marriage keep girls from attending school. Refugee enrollment barriers need to be addressed. Forced displacement interventions require a strong gender-sensitive approach, given the large proportion of women among the displaced and their unique vulnerabilities. In Colombia, nearly 80 percent of IDPs are women or children—women head almost half of displaced households compared with a national average of 23 percent. In South Sudan, 86 percent of refugees are women and children. Women face unique challenges in displacement scenarios. They are less likely to have access to jobs, resources, and services than men are. UNHCR reports that women who are heads of households in refugee camps tend to be more food insecure and lack income- generating opportunities, which suggests the need for specific support for economic empowerment of women-headed IDP or refugee households. According to the United States Agency for International Development, very few refugee women are involved in vocational training programs because “most vocational trainings were in trades that are more attractive to men.” Displaced women also face unique traumas. In one example, the Development Assistance Committee says, “Women occasionally engage in transactional sex to support their food security.” Evidence suggests that gender, as it relates to forced displacement, is not integrated fully into country strategies, interventions, or project monitoring. The link between gender programming and forced displacement varies considerably across countries. Several countries, such as Colombia, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Uganda, have had heavily gender-oriented operations or country strategies. In Jordan and Lebanon, the influence of GCFF donors to focus on gender may have contributed to the increased targeting of refugee and host community women. Good examples of gender-informed operations were found in Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon. For example, the Jordan Emergency Health Project helps the Ministry of Health produce protocols, guidance, and communication on gender-based violence. In education, the World Bank is supporting gender-sensitive education to prevent gender stereotyping in teaching and is supporting the Ministry of Education’s Gender Unit to mainstream gender across all project activities. In Lebanon, the Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program pays attention to issues of gender and employment. The project supports active labor market programs that serve women, advocacy campaigns to support women’s economic empowerment through the Office of the Minister of State for Women’s Affairs, and a pilot to improve access to quality childcare to facilitate female labor force participation (World Bank 2018a, 15). In Ethiopia, the Economic Opportunities Program-for-Results—funded through the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window—is piloting the Employment Promotion and Protection scheme, which requires adequate childcare arrangements, among other services, to improve the likelihood of female labor force participation (World Bank 2018d, 43–44). In Iraq, the Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project supports the government’s development agenda, which recognizes the role and contribution of female labor force participation to economic growth. The project targets female- specific constraints and vulnerabilities (for example, legal, structural, and social barriers to political and economic development) through tailored cash-for-work programs. The program also provides psychosocial support for survivors of gender-based violence (World Bank 2018b, 59–62). 30 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 Links between gender and displacement programming are weak in other countries such as Somalia, South Sudan, and Turkey. In Kenya, where public works and livelihood interventions have quotas for women, there is a need to further address underlying constraints, such as elder- or childcare responsibilities, social structures, or cultural norms for women to participate. Interviews with World Bank staff indicate the need for greater synergies between FCV and the Gender Global Theme. Monitoring the Effort The evaluation observed opportunities to improve monitoring and evaluation to learn from interventions. Of the 60 closed projects providing direct support, IEG validated 54 of them.23 Only 16 projects reported intermediate or longer-term outcomes, and most focused on outputs—they simply counted the number of beneficiaries receiving project support. Intermediate outcome indicators typically measured access to services. Very few outcome indicators were included, such as improved livelihoods or economic opportunities (Croatia, Eritrea, and Sri Lanka) or improved educational performance (the Philippines and Sierra Leone). The World Bank’s forced displacement projects lack specific indicators to monitor and evaluate effects on displaced populations, but operations approved during FY10–17 show improvements. Of the 103 projects relevant to forced displacement approved in FY00–17, 55 did not disaggregate project monitoring indicators by group, even though 39 targeted a forcibly displaced group or host community. However, the percentage improved from 19 percent in FY00–09 to 49 percent in FY10–17. In addition, among operations approved between FY12 and FY17, most of them (39 of 42) disaggregate indicators by gender, but only 14 of 42 projects planned to disaggregate by refugee, IDP, or returnee, and gender. The rest of the evaluated projects reported aggregate data for vulnerable groups and war- or conflict-affected communities. Examples of disaggregated outputs and outcomes include the following: IDPs returned to place of origin, increased income and agriculture productivity, lower incidence of displacement, families returned to normal agricultural life, jobs created, and increased health care use. For example, in Sri Lanka, the Puttalam Housing Project prepared 130 resettlement plans for IDPs. The project provided IDPs with 7,050 housing units, and IDP households received safe drinking water (3,754 households) and latrines (774 households). Additionally, in Angola, returning IDPs adopted improved agricultural technology, and agricultural production increased by 66 percent. These outputs and outcomes were likely achieved through farmer training and membership in a farmer collective (appendix G). The World Bank’s support in Colombia facilitated reaching more IDPs with the Familias en Acción conditional cash transfer program, which increased the coverage of displaced households from 40,000 in 2005 to 500,000 in 2013. It is estimated that the program currently serves one-third of the displaced population (World Bank 2016d). The evaluation found examples of improvements in monitoring and evaluation. For example, in Azerbaijan, the Internally Displaced Persons Economic Development Project (FY05) provided 2,500 microcredits to IDPs, but data were not collected on the effects of the microcredits on the participants’ financial situations. The project also provided short-term employment opportunities (through microprojects) for 2,000 people, of which 68 percent were IDPs, but no data were available Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 31 on economic opportunity. Data were not collected on the effects of the microproject component on the participants’ financial situations (including any effects on household consumption or saving and investment behaviors). In summary, project data collection does not provide much evidence of reduced vulnerabilities or enhanced self-reliance. However, in the Internally Displaced Persons Standards and Livelihoods Project (FY12), operational reports suggest the quality and sustainability of IDPs’ livelihoods have increased by 43 percent, which provides some indication of reduced vulnerabilities and enhanced self-reliance.24 1  conflict-induced population is considered large if it is greater than 25,000 people or the forcibly displaced population A comprises at least 0.2 percent of the total population. The definition is different from the one used for the Global Concessional Financing Facility (GCFF) and the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities. To account for the sudden and rapid movement of forcibly displaced people, the sample of countries was determined at three points in time: 2000, 2009, and 2016. 2  total of 160 pieces of Advisory Services and Analytics were identified with completion dates between FY00 and A FY21. Appendix C provides the full list. 3  hirteen of 161 completed analytical works focused on returnees (8 percent), 89 of 161 completed analytical works T address internally displaced persons (55 percent), 107 completed analytical works address refugees (66 percent), and 78 of 161 completed analytical works on forced displacement are regionally or globally focused (48 percent). 4  uch of the regional analytical work emerged from the Global Program on Forced Displacement and the Global M Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development. 5  etween 2009 and 2016, the Global Program on Forced Displacement carried out analytical work to raise awareness B within the World Bank Group and the broader development community of the development impact of conflict-induced forced displacement and to improve the World Bank Group’s contribution to an enhanced development response that supports economically and socially sustainable solutions (World Bank Group 2015, 5). 6  he Social Cohesion and Reconciliation Index was developed by the United Nations Development Programme Action T for Cooperation and Trust and the Centre for Sustainable Peace and Democratic Development, funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. For more information, see http://www.scoreforpeace.org/. 7  he World Bank approved 73 projects during FY00–17 that may have indirectly supported internally displaced persons T and returnees through wide-ranging rehabilitation and reconstruction in postconflict settings. 8  he total volume does not reflect FY18 approvals, including new resources committed under the IDA18 Refugee T Sub-Window, FY18 resources mobilized through the GCFF, or other financing from IDA, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, or multidonor trust funds. In FY18, 18 projects were approved in case study countries, countries assessed as IDA18-eligible (as of September 2018), countries receiving GCFF financing, and countries singled out in interviews with staff (totaling $3.7 billion). Eight projects totaling $1.3 billion received grants through the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window; four projects totaling $1.7 billion received concessional financing from the GCFF; and the remaining six projects were financed through a Europe and Central Asia multidonor trust fund, a Middle East and North Africa multidonor trust fund, IDA, and International Bank for Reconstruction and Development totaling $669 million. IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window recipient countries include Bangladesh, Cameroon, Ethiopia, and Uganda; Jordan and Lebanon received concessional financing through the GCFF. To adjust for inflation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index Research Series was used. 9 O  nly 24 countries with large forcibly displaced populations were identified as having a significant strategy on forced displacement based on the indicative program laid out in country strategies. Often, new projects will be financed during the strategy period. Twelve percent of World Bank support between FY00 and FY17 went to countries that were not classified as having a large forcibly displaced population in 2000, 2009, or 2016. 32 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 10  etween FY10 and FY15, only two projects supporting IDPs and six supporting IDPs and host communities were B approved. 11 A  ustralia, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom are the contributing donors and development partners of the multidonor State and Peacebuilding Trust Fund. The five focus areas are forced displacement, the humanitarian-development-peace nexus, prevention and recovery, crisis response, and financing solutions. 12 T  he Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund received $75 million in contributions from Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, and from the World Bank–managed State and Peacebuilding Fund. 13  he International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq was endorsed at the Madrid Donor Conference in 2003 in T response to international requests for donors to channel their resources and coordinate their support. It comprises two trust funds: a World Bank Iraq Trust Fund and a United Nations Development Group Iraq Trust Fund. The International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq is led by a Facility Donor Committee and coordinated by a Facility Coordination Committee (the World Bank, United Nations Development Group, and International Monetary Fund as observers). World Bank support focuses on reconstruction, which may indirectly benefit IDPs and returnees. Contributions to the United Nations Development Programme Iraq Trust Fund are earmarked for assistance to IDPs and returnees where the program has a comparative advantage, for example, protection and reintegration. 14  he Concessional Financing Facility for Jordan and Lebanon was launched in April 2016. It was renamed the T Global Concessional Financing Facility in September 2016 and the focus was broadened from only Jordan and Lebanon to any middle-income country meeting the established eligibility criteria. New Benefitting Countries must meet two criteria and a consensus vote by Supporting Countries. The criteria are: (i) the country hosts more than 25,000 refugees and such refugees represent more than 0.1 percent of the host country’s population, and (ii) the country is committed to principles that contribute to long-term solutions benefiting both refugees and host communities. Further, the country should have an adequate framework for the protection of refugees, based on adherence to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, or the adoption of national policies and practices consistent with the principles within these instruments (as well as considering its adherence to any relevant regional instruments). In addition, the country should demonstrate its commitment to progressive policy or legal reforms with regard to refugees, for example, on freedom of movement, identification documents and residency permits, access to the formal labor market and labor rights, and access to education, social services, and basic infrastructure. Supporting Countries may also consider additional factors when deciding to add a Benefiting Country including, but not limited to (i) the country’s total financing needs and its existing financing support (comprising humanitarian and development support), (ii) the country’s debt sustainability, (iii) the socioeconomic impact of the influx of refugees on host communities of the country, and (iv) whether the country is experiencing an active refugee crisis (World Bank Group 2017b, 5). Currently, Colombia, Jordan, and Lebanon are the only countries receiving GCFF funding. 15  wo of four GCFF-funded projects in Lebanon are effective: the Lebanon Health Resilience Project and the Roads T and Employment Project. Political changes caused delays from project approval to effectiveness—ranging from nine months for the Greater Beirut Public Transport Project (with a revised expected effectiveness of date December 28, 2018) to 16.9 months for the Lebanon Health and Resilience Project to 21.3 months for the Roads and Employment Project. The Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program was approved June 27, 2018, and is not yet effective. All data as of December 14, 2018. 16  Projects in Bangladesh target refugees only. These projects were approved on an exceptional basis. 17  oth host community members and refugees are listed as project beneficiaries; however, with encampment policies B still in place, support for refugees is considered indirect. 18  perations originated mainly from the following Global Practices: Social, Urban, and Rural Resilience (n = 30); Social O Protection and Labor (n = 23); Health, Nutrition, and Population (n = 18); and Education (n = 7). 19  Public works fell into two categories: (i) community-driven development projects with small-scale infrastructure Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 33 subprojects, which provided public works and promoted social cohesion, and (ii) short-term, labor-intensive public works on large-scale infrastructure projects. 20 The U.S. Agency for International Development Jordan Local Enterprise Support Project, working in close  collaboration with the government of Jordan—the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, and the Greater Amman Municipality—was instrumental to the new legal framework supporting new opportunities for home-based businesses. https://jordanlens.org/activity/launch-home-based-business-regulations-october-19-2017. 21 Another seven operations were supported through community-driven development–type interventions.  22 For more information on the No Lost Generation strategy, read the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’  January 7, 2014, press release on the strategy at http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/news/press/2014/1/52cba9099/urgent- call-massive-investment-prevent-lost-generation-syrian-children.html. 23  he Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) could not find an Implementation Completion and Results Report or T Implementation Completion and Results Report Review for six projects. 24 T  he 43 percent increase reported reflects administrative data for the Livelihood Support Component, specifically the subcomponent on income-generating activities. An impact evaluation is planned with a target of a 20 percent increase of quality and sustainability of IDP livelihoods (treatment group) compared with a control group. 34 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 2 3 highlights Policy The World Bank works centrally with the Dialogue and government and is therefore positioned well Strategic to engage in dialogue and bring in ministries Partnerships previously absent from discussions related to refugees and internally displaced persons. However, this can also mean that governments can define priorities constraining the World Bank’s push for reforms. Case studies identified several examples of World Bank analytical work building awareness of the specific vulnerabilities of the displaced and host communities. Fewer examples of reforms or institutional changes emerged given the newness of the focus and political economy. The Global Concessional Financing Facility and the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities in the 18th Replenishment of the International Development Association provide an opportunity to pursue policy dialogue and reform. The incentivized financing and intrinsic coordination mechanisms have been leveraged in some countries. Greater attention to 35 refugee-specific targeting and medium-term solutions is emerging. The World Bank recently engaged in forced displacement issues at the global level, with a focus on refugee issues. International dialogue on IDPs has not kept pace. The World Bank leverages existing coordination platforms, such as the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework, compacts, or government- established mechanisms, and pursues various strategic partnerships at the corporate and country levels. Not all platforms work as intended, constrained by various factors. Additionally, there is scope for more partnerships at the country level based on strategic selectivity, where the benefits of partnering outweigh the transaction costs. The World Bank Group has had limited engagement in catalyzing the private sector’s supporting role in situations of forced displacement. The Bank Group and its development partners can add value by exploring opportunities and mechanisms to bring the private and informal sector into this agenda. 36 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 T H I S C H A P T E R assesses how the Bank Group uses policy dialogue and strategic partnerships in situations involving conflict-induced forced displacement. The assessment focuses on FY16–18 and is benchmarked against the theory of change. A development approach requires partnerships with national and municipal governments, regional development banks, humanitarian agencies, security services, and political actors (Zetter 2014). Coordination means finding effective modalities to coordinate and integrating efforts with philanthropic institutions, the private sector, and civil society (Ferris 2016; Zetter 2014). Evidence of the Bank Group’s cooperation with partners and dialogue with governments is derived mostly from case studies and interviews with external stakeholders and Bank Group staff and management. Leveraging Policy Dialogue for Institutional Change and Reform The World Bank works centrally with governments, which means it is positioned well to engage in dialogue with them. External stakeholders noted that the World Bank convenes line ministries into dialogue on forced displacement—especially the ministries of finance and planning previously absent from such discussions. External stakeholders also believed that the World Bank’s economic orientation situates it well to engage in dialogue on issues of sustainability, efficiency, and cost- effectiveness. However, external stakeholders remarked on the need for the World Bank to become more familiar with country policy and institutional frameworks. In some instances, the World Bank may decide not to advance politically sensitive reforms or to engage in policy dialogue (to preserve its relationship with the client government). For example, external stakeholders and experts noted that the development community, including the World Bank, lacks policy dialogue in Kenya related to IDPs. World Bank staff and management reported difficulty in engaging a government that is the source of displacement or involved in ongoing conflict. In these cases, the World Bank, with its government-centered approach, may not be ideally positioned to lead policy dialogue. External stakeholders suggested that, at times, humanitarian actors might be better placed to create entry points to engage in dialogue related to IDPs. Creating Awareness Case studies observed several examples of the World Bank’s analytical knowledge building government awareness of the vulnerabilities of the displaced and host communities during FY09–18. External stakeholders acknowledged the influence World Bank analytical work had in their own policy discussions with the government. For example, World Bank analytical work contributed significantly to highlighting the problems faced by the IDPs in Azerbaijan. In 2002, a joint government and World Bank survey found a growing sense of dissatisfaction and hopelessness among IDPs. Consequently, the government launched a comprehensive housing plan that drew on resources from the state Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 37 oil fund. Although the temporary status of the IDPs and their return remain a political priority, the government has modified its approach and now addresses some of the IDPs’ current economic vulnerabilities. However, policy and programming constraints remain. IDPs cannot own land, are not integrated into the national school system, and remain outside the social safety net systems. Spurring Institutional Changes and Policy Reform The World Bank has recently turned its attention to institutional changes and policy reforms for medium-term solutions, with some initial encouraging results. When the World Bank is positioned well to engage in dialogue with governments, the critical question to answer is whether institutional changes or policy reforms have been advanced beyond building government awareness of the vulnerabilities of the displaced. Interviews with World Bank staff and management affirmed the importance of focusing on institutions and policies to promote economic opportunities, mobility, and services for the displaced. The evaluation found a small but growing portfolio in this new area. The World Bank’s policy dialogue contributed to a new regulation in Turkey for work permits for Syrians under temporary protection, and to changes in work permit regulations to help Syrian refugees in Jordan. The GCFF provides an opportunity to pursue policy dialogue and reform, which may not have been fully exploited at first. The GCFF operations manual specifies that financing must contribute to countries’ development agendas, provide benefits for both refugees and host communities, and demonstrate government commitment to reform (World Bank Group 2017b, 4–5). Leveraging policy changes and dialogue with GCFF financing was an aspect that external stakeholders and donors believed was not adequately used, with projects lacking specific refugee targets. In FY18, supporting countries leveraged the GCFF platform to dialogue with the government of Jordan, pushing for more refugee-specific targeting in the GCFF-funded Jordan First Equitable Growth and Job Creation Programmatic Development Policy Financing, and with the government of Lebanon on the design of the Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program, which relies on a number of policy changes to achieve its objectives. The opportunity to use the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities (IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window) to pursue policy dialogue and reform is critical and appears to have been leveraged with some countries. In Ethiopia, the World Bank and UNHCR are trying to leverage IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window resources to encourage the government to adopt legislation and move its policies in a new direction. The government of Ethiopia recognized the limitations created by its refugee encampment policy and made nine pledges at the Leader’s Summit on Refugees in 2016, subject to the availability of external resources.1 These pledges could expand the out-of-camp population, provide work permits, increase educational and social services, and build industrial parks that could provide up to 30 percent of the jobs created for refugees. The World Bank will be constrained by the degree to which Ethiopia’s Administration for Refugees and Return Affairs can move forward with line ministries and create partnerships with the administrative divisions to implement its program. This case highlights the difficult political economy the World Bank can face in moving policy dialogue and reform forward. 38 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 Because the World Bank works through governments, the client governments will define the scope of the agenda in play. This may be less problematic with progressive approaches to forced displacement, though it will not be without challenges. Where the approach is more conservative, the extent to which the World Bank can reform policies may be limited. In Kenya, resources from the anticipated IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window are expected to focus on the government’s action plan for the Nairobi Declaration and to support Turkana, Garissa, and Wajir Counties, where opportunities are available for integrating host communities and refugees and providing financial inclusion to refugees. Integrating Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons in Development Planning The World Bank, together with partners, has encouraged governments to integrate the displaced in national development plans. The intent is to ensure that existing planning efforts accommodate the vulnerabilities of the displaced. The planning process can also be a vehicle to include the voice of the displaced through civil society organizations. Uganda has leveraged national planning efforts for multiple purposes. In March 2018, the country adopted the Educational Response Plan for refugees and host communities to address the erosion in education quality in government schools caused by the influx of refugees. The government of Uganda has also committed to using the midterm review of its National Development Plan to include the refugee response so that it can coordinate humanitarian and development actors within its national planning, in alignment with the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (UNHCR 2016a, 2018b). In response to findings from the stocktaking exercise, the government initiated a process, supported by UNDP and the World Bank, to improve the refugee response at the national and district levels and integrate refugees into district planning.2 Other examples are found in Jordan, Kenya, and Somalia. Leveraging Coordination Platforms and Partnerships to Improve Coherence and Avoid Duplication Cooperation among humanitarian and development actors on refugee issues has been receiving more attention since 2016. The Syrian refugee crisis and other conflicts, the large-scale arrival of refugees into Europe, and the recognition that the humanitarian model is unsustainable have all contributed to a change in international discourse.3 Global and Regional Platforms The growing awareness of refugee issues is the reason political leaders, humanitarian actors, and development actors—including the Bank Group—have come together at high-level events since 2016. These events included the World Humanitarian Summit (Istanbul 2016), the UN Summit on Refugees and Migrants (New York 2016), the International Conference on Supporting Syria and the Region (London 2016), and Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region (Brussels 2017 and 2018). Global discussions with diverse stakeholders led to the creation of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (2016) and the Global Compact for Refugees (2018). The Bank Group’s contribution to these meetings is underpinned by its participation in the Grand Bargain, as a member of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee for humanitarian coordination, and its flagship report on forced displacement—Forcibly Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 39 Displaced: Toward a Development Approach Supporting Refugees, the Internally Displaced, and Their Hosts—which helped improve global understanding of forced displacement from a development perspective. These meetings demonstrate a global shared responsibility and foster national commitments and government accountability for refugee issues. For example, at the High-Level Meeting on Global Responsibility Sharing through Pathways for Admission of Syrian Refugees in March 2016, traditional understandings of refugee resettlements were expanded to explicitly recognize the global public good that refugee-hosting countries provide. These events have focused on crowding in resources, making resources more predictable, increasing the efficiency of resources, and improving burden sharing for governments hosting refugees. The Concessional Financing Facility for the Middle East and North Africa Region and its scaling-up to the GCFF (2016), the Jordan Compact (2016), and the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window evolved from these meetings and are aligned with the development approach. IDP issues lack the same level of global focus. Shared responsibility among the international community or commitments from host governments have not emerged for IDPs (Ferris 2016). Notable exceptions are the World Humanitarian Summit, which recommended reducing the number of IDPs by 50 percent by 2030; the declaration of the 2030 Agenda, which includes both IDPs and refugees; and the 20th Anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: Plan of Action for Advancing Prevention, Protection, and Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons (2018–20). The Bank Group participates in all of these but has not elevated its involvement in the same way that it has recently with refugee issues. One reason could be the moral hazard that incentivizing a government to displace its own people can create. Thus, the issue for development agencies— including the World Bank—is to better integrate IDPs into development planning and to better target IDPs in programming. As part of the IDA18 replenishment, outlined in IDA18 Overarching Theme: Toward 2030: Investing in Growth, Resilience, and Opportunity, a joint secretariat was formed to tackle forced displacement (World Bank 2016b). In line with previous years’ focus on FCV, IDA18 calls for stronger collaboration between the UN and multilateral development banks to improve outcomes in host countries. IDA delegates expressed concern for IDPs, which they acknowledge are among the most vulnerable of the poor, and displaced women, who face gender-based violence and other specific challenges in forced displacement situations. At the World Bank Group’s 2018 Spring Meetings, the Bank Group announced a new multilateral development bank platform for coordinating responses to economic migration and forced displacement. The platform’s main purpose is to enhance strategic dialogue and operational coordination between multilateral development banks to maximize the impact of development actors’ growing engagement in situations of protracted displacement. However, UN agencies (for example, UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration) are invited as observers or for specific purposes, which is likely to improve information sharing between development and humanitarian actors.4 40 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 Strategic Partnership between the World Bank Group and UNHCR The World Bank and UNHCR formed a strategic partnership in 2015 to achieve greater complementarities in development and humanitarian cooperation (UNHCR 2018a; World Bank 2017c). The partnership emerged from joint analytical work and institutional dialogue between UNHCR and the Bank Group’s Forced Displacement team in the FCV Global Theme. The partnership leverages each institution’s comparative advantage, facilitated by a clear division of responsibilities. The Bank Group and UNHCR have worked closely to design and roll out the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window. The World Bank, in consultation with UNHCR, ensures that an adequate framework for the protection of refugees is present for governments to receive resources from the Sub-Window (World Bank 2017b). The institutions jointly conduct missions, policy dialogue, and training. According to interviews with external stakeholders, the Bank Group and UNHCR consulted with a wide range of humanitarian and development actors and civil society organizations while designing the program. The Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) is another area of engagement between the World Bank and UNHCR. The CRRF was established to facilitate better synergies between humanitarian and development actors. A UNHCR-led secretariat, to which the World Bank has staff seconded, spearheads the CRRF. The World Bank is supporting UNHCR with CRRF in Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, and Uganda. Fostering Strategic Regional Partnerships The World Bank has engaged in regional partnerships to a limited extent, despite an important subregional dimension with refugees. The World Bank and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) directly support one of the few regional approaches: the Regional Secretariat on Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa. An IDA grant of $8 million from Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project I and II funded the secretariat. IGAD has convening powers and a political mandate within its eight member countries, positioning it to lead policy dialogue on forced displacement and mixed migration. Options for durable solutions for refugees and IDPs in the subregion are few, and current policies and practices in most member countries are not conducive to developing transitional solutions. Developing transitional solutions is a point of focus and still a work in progress for the secretariat. A recent example is a conference held in Nairobi on how to integrate refugees into national education programs, convened jointly by Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and IGAD. The secretariat will need to support cross-country learning from member states to transition to more progressive policies and support more consistent data on refugee camp populations and self-settled refugees in rural and urban host communities. The secretariat will also need increased responsibility to monitor implementation because it is currently unclear how member states subsequently implement policy frameworks. The World Bank is developing a regional plan for its engagement in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The plan is expected to address links across countries and partners. However, recognition of the need to strategically mainstream displacement in the regional portfolio occurred only recently. Country-Level Partnerships and Platforms The World Bank’s level of engagement with development and humanitarian actors other than the UNHCR is less formal and less systematic. There is room to foster more active engagement at the Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 41 country level based on strategic selectivity, where the benefits of partnering outweigh the transaction costs. As well, partnering with humanitarian organizations on policy dialogue must take the institutional mandates of the organizations into account. Humanitarian organizations often focus on more narrow populations of concern, whereas the Bank Group’s mandate is to reduce poverty and improve shared prosperity for the poor and vulnerable. At the same time, selective strategic partnerships can play a role in various contexts and sectors. For example, in the Republic of Yemen, the World Bank has no direct entry point due to ongoing conflict, but it has been able to support IDPs by partnering with WFP, the World Health Organization, UNDP, and UNICEF (as implementing agencies).5 In other cases, strategic partnerships have worked well to pursue common sector-specific agendas. For instance, in Lebanon, the World Bank’s Reaching All Children with Education in Lebanon Support Project (FY17) was prepared in close cooperation with UNHCR, UNICEF, DFID, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the United States Agency for International Development, and the EU, among others. In Jordan, the World Bank’s Education Reform Support Program-for-Results Project (FY18) was prepared in close coordination with other development partners to develop synergies. For example, the World Bank project focuses on quality assurance and teacher training, whereas other donors address school construction and rehabilitation (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, the United States Agency for International Development, and the EU) or teacher salaries for second-shift schools for Syrian children (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, Canada Global Affairs, and DFID). UNICEF is leading in the provision of nonformal education to Syrian refugees through its Catching Up program. In several countries, the World Bank is partnering with other actors to conduct sector-specific analytical work and data collection. This suggests the need for the World Bank to further leverage partnerships when they can bring useful complementarities. The World Bank engages with coordinating mechanisms, such as the CRRF and compacts, or leverages government-established platforms. These platforms provide an opportunity to improve coherence in the response. Case studies illustrate successful (and less successful) examples of engagement with development partners and governments and the different roles the World Bank has played in those settings. Among other factors, platforms work better when they are tailored to local contexts and when there is strong government leadership, clear common expectations on objectives, and streamlined coordination arrangements. Sufficient time and resources are also needed to make them work. The Jordan Compact is a good example of the World Bank taking a leading role. The Jordan Compact, adopted in 2016, is an approach leveraged by the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the EU, and bilateral donors to align “incentives in one systematic model with clear requirements and direct accountability.”6 The Jordan Compact demonstrates the power of political capital, political will, and political and economic incentives. The policy environment has become more progressive, and more Syrians are in school and formal employment. However, it has shortcomings. The refugee perspective was not included in its design, and it is ambitious in a country with high informality in the labor market. Additionally, the evidence on the impact of work permits, special economic zones, trade liberalization, and business formalization is mixed (Barbelet, Hagen-Zanker, and Mansour-Ille 2018; IRC 2017). A recent analysis of early implementation experience indicates a further need for coherence among actors (Huang et al. 2018). The lessons that are emerging can help shape 42 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 future compacts and the design of World Bank projects in support of compacts. Box 3.1 describes the Jordan Compact as an example of actors jointly promoting economic opportunities for both host communities and Syrian refugees in Jordan. Example of Operationally Relevant Knowledge Collaboration Box 3.1 |  Since 2014, Jordan, in coordination with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and other United Nations agencies, has produced Jordan Response Plans (JRPs), three-year rolling plans outlining the impact of the Syrian refugee crisis on Jordan. Each JRP includes a comprehensive vulnerability assessment by sector that defines the country’s refugee and host community needs and facilitates aid coordination. In February 2016, the government of Jordan and the international community adopted the Jordan Compact, a nationally led agreement designed through negotiations between the government of Jordan, the United Kingdom, and the World Bank. Both the JRP and the Jordan Compact are proactive and progressive approaches to situations of protracted refugee displacement and platforms for coordinating humanitarian and donor support for the crisis. The Jordan Compact is premised on the agreement that Jordan is providing a global public good by hosting a large population of Syrian refugees and that the refugee crisis presents a development opportunity for the country. It focuses on creating jobs, improving education, and installing a stable macrofiscal framework (as required by the International Monetary Fund’s Extended Fund Facility program). Specific commitments from the compact include the government of Jordan’s promise to issue 200,000 work permits for Syrian refugees in specified sectors and implement business and investment reforms to promote private sector investment, including formalizing Syrian businesses; a commitment from the European Union to relax trade regulations to stimulate exports from special economic zones and industrial areas in Jordan, in return for employment quotas for Syrian refugees in these businesses; and access to education for all Syrian refugee children. Exceptional International Development Association financing and concessional financing are other factors supporting implementation of the Jordan Compact. Since the compact was established, five of eight projects approved in Jordan received concessional financing. These projects support the compact’s goals by providing economic opportunities, supporting education, and maintaining Jordan’s macroeconomic stability through water and energy sector reforms. Sources: Barbelet, Hagen-Zanker, and Mansour-Ille 2018; Jordan (government of) 2016, 2018; World Bank 2016e; World Bank Group 2014a. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 43 Ethiopia illustrates another coordination mechanism comprising multiple committees in which the World Bank participates. The CRRF, for which Ethiopia is a pilot, acts as the overall framework for building synergies between humanitarian and development partners in that country, but it may be an inefficient process. The Development Partners Working Group on Forced Displacement is part of the regular donor coordination mechanisms in place; UNHCR heads it, and the World Bank takes part in meetings. Development partners consider it useful for sharing information on what respective agencies are doing in this area. A formal steering committee supports the government in meeting the nine pledges. This committee reports directly to the Office of the Prime Minister, and UNHCR and the Administration for Refugees and Return Affairs are cochairs of this group. Six technical committees will be set up to work on the pledges. Some of these groups may need to be streamlined (Huang et al. 2018). Recently, the World Bank was asked to colead coordination of the CRRF in Uganda. The government’s Refugee and Host Population Empowerment (ReHoPE) strategy is fully aligned with and preceded the CRRF. Still, the CRRF has supported Uganda secure multiyear financing— including through the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window (Uganda 2018). The government there has made systematic efforts to coordinate support provided by the Bank Group and UN agencies, including WFP, UNDP, and UNHCR. Box 3.2 describes the World Bank’s role in Uganda and how it tries to bring other partners into an approach that is more integrated, which is a challenge. The Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.2 |  The World Bank, government of Uganda, and United Nations are working together to develop a coordinated response to forced displacement to mitigate shocks from the influx of refugees and promote sustainable solutions for protracted refugee situations. The World Bank understands that a collective approach to addressing forced displacement can benefit refugees and host communities that have been underserved and now find themselves under additional pressure from the influx of refugees. The Refugee and Host Population Empowerment (ReHoPE) strategy is a multiyear joint system that seeks to advance the humanitarian-development nexus and promote self-reliance and resilience among refugees and host district populations through joint analysis, collective advocacy, integrated service delivery, and joint resource mobilization. ReHoPE predated the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) in Uganda. The introduction of the CRRF after the development of the ReHoPE strategy means that the connectivity between the two mechanisms had to be established and communicated to partners. Continued 44 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3  he Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.2 | T (continued) Key Players in Addressing Forced Displacement The key counterpart for forced displacement is the Office of the Prime Minister, which has central and local-level authority and reach. The Office of the Prime Minister is critical to overall coherence—it allows for ongoing dialogue between the stakeholders and aligns efforts to address forced displacement at the local level with a national strategy. Key partners with the World Bank in addressing forced displacement are the Office of the United Nations (UN) Resident Coordinator, UN High Commissioner for Refugees, UN Development Programme, and World Food Programme. The World Bank also works closely with major donors and recently entered into a strategic partnership with the U.K. Department for International Development, the Netherlands, and Norway. The World Bank’s Role The World Bank is playing a central role in the crowded landscape through its support for ReHoPE. Financial contributions are made through the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project, which is aimed at improving access to basic social services, expanding economic opportunities, and enhancing environmental management for host communities. The World Bank also supported a stocktaking exercise under ReHoPE in refugee-hosting districts in Uganda to inform the identification, design, and scaling-up of effective programs and interventions through mapping existing funding flows, gap analysis, and assessment of existing coordination, planning processes, and stakeholder alignment. The Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project is the government’s flagship program for the operationalization of the CRRF and ReHoPE. The project can potentially be a vehicle for harmonizing approaches and ensuring more consistency, coordination, and, ultimately, impact in districts hosting refugees. Key informants suggested that placement of the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project under the ReHoPE umbrella could be a signal to other donors regarding strategic intent relative to forced displacement and the humanitarian-development nexus (noting that many donors have tended to operate through parallel implementing systems on refugee-related matters, such as through nongovernmental organizations). At the time of the Independent Evaluation Group’s mission in January 2018, the country team was trying to bring other donors (for example, the U.K. Department for International Development and the Netherlands) into a more integrated approach because it was aware of the need for a collective approach, given the scale of the challenge. Efficiencies, clarity, and economic focus (that is, development of local economies, local markets, and skills) are key concerns of the World Bank. Continued Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 45  he Partnership Landscape in Uganda and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.2 | T (continued) Challenges to Coordinating the Partnership Landscape The World Bank has encountered challenges in trying to improve the coordination among partners resulting from the reluctance of some to engage through government systems, a consequence of prior experiences. Challenges also arise in resourcing the partnership effort with adequate staff time, given its complexity and the transversal agendas in question. Cooperation between humanitarian and development actors is also needed to avoid duplication (see figure 2.6 for the overlap across actors and areas that receive less focus, discussed in chapter 2). In Uganda, a stocktaking exercise found that the activities of different stakeholders are not well coordinated, and data on funding are insufficient, leading to gaps, duplications, and missed opportunities to leverage comparative advantages. The exercise also identified priority sectors such as the environment, energy, water, sanitation, and roads. Funding for environmental protection was very low compared with the needs that primary informants articulated. In Turkey, the World Bank receives financing through the EU-funded Facility for Refugees in Turkey, and thus coordinates with the EU by design and carries out implementation with UN agencies where it is mutually beneficial. External stakeholders reported that the World Bank adds value by pointing to overlaps and inefficiencies during coordination meetings. The Center for Global Development noted a greater need across countries for partners to engage in joint planning to achieve shared outcomes and avoid duplication (Huang et al. 2018). In Lebanon, the situation is mixed. In the education sector, UNICEF and the World Bank support the government’s Reaching All Children with Education Plan. A formal agreement with concrete areas of collaboration was established between the World Bank and UNHCR in March 2018. Coordination in other sectors is weaker. Box 3.3 describes the situation in Lebanon where, despite multiple coordinating mechanisms, the response among actors may still not be fully coherent. Engaging with Partners to Learn Lessons With limited knowledge of what works and how to operationalize a development approach, the World Bank is attempting to meet the need for learning across institutions. The Bank Group’s FCV Global Theme established a Forced Displacement Community of Practice to build awareness of a development response, synergize efforts among humanitarian and development partners, and share tacit knowledge. Forced displacement was a central topic at the Bank Group’s Fragility Forums in 2016 and 2018 and at the Annual and Spring Meetings (2016–18), all which convened 46 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 The Partnership Landscape in Lebanon and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.3 |  From the onset of the Syrian crisis, the Lebanese government lacked a comprehensive framework for recognizing the presence of Syrian refugees, identifying local governments’ responsibilities, and developing legal parameters for refugees’ residency and labor. Thus, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) initially led the response by coordinating the humanitarian aid and issuing humanitarian appeals. The World Bank started to support Lebanon through a multidonor trust fund (the Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund) and the Global Concessional Financing Facility (GCFF), which eases International Bank for Reconstruction and Development borrowing terms. Key Players in Addressing Forced Displacement The European Union (EU) is the leading donor in the international response to the Syrian crisis. The EU has allocated more than €1.2 billion in assistance to refugees and vulnerable communities in Lebanon since the beginning of the crisis. This commitment supports the partnership priorities and compact adopted by the EU and the government of Lebanon in December 2016, with an objective to improve the living conditions of refugees and host communities. Most development assistance is channeled through the GCFF. Canada, Denmark, the European Commission, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States contribute. How Partners Work and Coordinate In 2012, the government of Lebanon, with support from UNHCR, established the interministerial committee to organize the government’s response to the Syrian humanitarian crisis. At the same time, the UNHCR issued a regional response plan that subsequently introduced a resilience component to the response, and the plan became known as the Lebanon Crisis Response Plan. In February 2014, the government established a task force to supervise crisis management and deal with the Syrian refugees and gave responsibility for coordinating the response to the Minister of Social Affairs. Working groups, each with a lead agency (either a UN agency or international nongovernmental organization), were established in sectors heavily impacted by the influx of refugees to coordinate efforts at the national and subnational levels and deal with information management. The group coordinates the overall response and ensures its alignment with government priorities. Relevant line ministries are also involved in the coordination role and host monthly working group meetings. Continued Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 47  he Partnership Landscape in Lebanon and the World Bank’s Role Box 3.3 | T (continued) In addition, in 2017 the government created a high-level steering committee, chaired by Lebanon’s prime minister, to be the primary platform for dialogue and policy discussions with international partners. The World Bank’s Role The World Bank and the UN are cochairs of the Lebanon Development Forum, which has reportedly facilitated information sharing more than coordination among partners and improvement of the coherence and cost-effectiveness of international assistance. The World Bank and the UNHCR signed a formal agreement in March 2018, establishing concrete areas of collaboration. There are recent and promising signs of improved coordination between the World Bank and UNICEF in the education sector. international stakeholders on forced displacement issues. The World Bank participated in the Forced Displacement and Development Study Group convened by the Center for Global Development and the International Rescue Committee. Learning engagements with other development and humanitarian actors, supported by appropriate internal resources, could be greater. Informants stressed the need to keep feedback loops open if they are to learn lessons on implementation of the World Bank’s new instruments. Case studies also observed a need for the World Bank to learn systematically from the country experiences of other donors and international nongovernmental organizations. Ongoing and real-time learning are critical, given the fluidity of situations, and are consistent with the World Bank’s stated approach of learning by doing (World Bank 2017a). Catalyzing the Private Sector Overall, the Bank Group’s efforts to catalyze the private sector to implement a development approach in situations of forced displacement remain constrained. The Maximizing Finance for Development approach emphasizes the role of the private sector in economic growth and employment and for meeting global development goals. The approach requires that the Bank Group sequence its interventions and address policy and regulatory barriers to facilitate private sector engagement. The private sector, in turn, grows the local economy through direct private investment as a vehicle to provide sustainable solutions to forced displacement. This implies going beyond contracting the private sector to provide goods and services to supporting the implementation of policies 48 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 that remove constraints on the forcibly displaced, especially refugees, allowing them freedom of movement, the right to work, and the right to own and formalize businesses and assets.7 The Bank Group will need to engage in dialogue with governments, the private sector (formal and informal, foreign and local), and other development partners to improve preexisting regulatory and policy frameworks that constrain the fuller engagement of the private sector and investment. Large movements of forcibly displaced people can exacerbate previous host country fragilities. Fragility related to regional conflict can harm local businesses and cause the private sector to downscale, as happened to the tourism industry in Jordan and parts of Mali (World Bank 2016a). Recent efforts in Lebanon show the Bank Group working to help the government prepare its capital investment plan. The Bank Group took part in the Lebanon Investment in Infrastructure Conference held in Beirut, in March 2018, where financing opportunities and modalities for partnership with the private sector were discussed.8 The capital investment plan was presented at the 2018 Conférence économique pour le développement, par les réformes et avec les enterprises in Paris. The $20 billion plan includes a set of infrastructure projects in energy, water, transportation and telecommunications, and wastewater and solid waste management. IFC reviewed the projects and assessed the feasibility of private sector funding. The Bank Group advised the government on the 2017 public- private partnership law that the capital investment plan relies on. The Bank Group also highlighted associated priority reforms, such as the backlog of legislation needing approval to unlock the potential for private sector investment. However, early reports suggest that more reforms, including an anticorruption law, public procurement law, and treasury single account, are needed to increase government accountability and transparency to attract the private sector into Lebanon (World Bank 2018e). External stakeholders agreed that the Bank Group can add real value and leverage its comparative advantage more fully by exploring opportunities and mechanisms to bring the private and informal sectors into this agenda. However, the Bank Group had not effectively articulated how it was going to engage the private sector in relation to situations of forced displacement. The places where the displaced settle vary (urban areas or lagging regions), as do countries’ regulatory and policy frameworks and investment climates. Because current knowledge is limited in low- and middle- income countries, different and contextualized approaches to foster private sector solutions will need to be explored, piloted, fine-tuned, and eventually replicated and expanded (IFC 2018). IFC’s Africa Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations Program expects to release a document in early 2019 to share knowledge to assist the private sector in operationalizing engagements with refugees and host communities. Shortcomings are surfacing in the use of industrial parks and special economic zones for refugee employment, and case studies in Ethiopia and Jordan observed that the likely benefit for refugees is lower than anticipated (Huang et al. 2018). This suggests that the Bank Group and its partners need to work collectively to achieve refugee self-reliance. IFC’s initiative to set up the Kalobeyei Kakuma Challenge Fund (a business competition) in Kenya is an innovative and context- specific approach to encourage business development for refugees (including women) and host communities and to attract potential businesses, such as financial institutions, agricultural producers, and social service providers. The Bank Group can closely monitor the implementation of this initiative Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 49 to learn which aspects work and which are falling short, so it can adapt the approach accordingly for replication and scaling. The new IDA18 Private Sector Window (PSW) may be another entry point for both IFC and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency to engage in some situations of protracted displacement. The IDA18 PSW can derisk private investments in IDA-only fragile countries where commercial solutions are not available and other Bank Group instruments are insufficient to grow the domestic private sector or attract foreign investment. It could be used in certain cases to mobilize private capital for situations involving the long-term displaced. For example, there is a discussion in Kenya on whether this window could be leveraged in Garissa County with the closure of the camp hospital. The goal of the $2.5 billion PSW is to mobilize private sector investment in IDA countries, including fragile and conflict-affected situations. The PSW requires collaboration among IDA, IFC, the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, and IBRD. The PSW will offset investor risk and provide advantages to pioneering investments, making new and innovative projects viable. This window is expected to crowd in more foreign and domestic capital, especially if carried out with appropriate policy reforms. 1 At the time of the IEG’s mission in February 2018, the Parliament of Ethiopia had not approved the proclamation, which would formally translate the pledges into law. 2  or more information, read “Planning for All: Integrating Refugees in District Development” at https://reliefweb.int/ F report/uganda/planning-all-integrating-refugees-district-development. 3  or more information see “Too Important to Fail—Addressing the Humanitarian Financing Gap” at https:// F interagencystandingcommittee.org/system/files/hlp_report_too_important_to_failgcoaddressing_the_humanitarian_ financing_gap.pdf. 4 F  or more information on the platform launched by the African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, World Bank Group, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, European Investment Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, Islamic Development Bank Group, G-7 deputies and other strategic partners, including the European Commission and UNHCR, visit https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/04/20/mdbs- launch-new-platform-to-coordinate-support-for-economic-migration-and-forced-displacement. 5 S  even projects were approved in FY17–18 and processed under OP10.00 paragraph 12, Projects in Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints. 6  ttps://www.rescue.org/press-release/james-martin-memorial-lecture-2017-global-refugee-crisis-and-what-do-about- h it 7  inancially viable investment opportunities remain scarce. As noted, this is due to regulatory and policy barriers, F business environments that are not conducive to private sector investment, and conditions of extreme poverty in lagging regions where refugees and IDPs may settle. For-profit private sector initiatives are typically philanthropic (or part of corporate social responsibility agendas), funded through grants where a return on investment is not required. For more information on the Lebanon Investment in Infrastructure Conference, visit https://www.iktissadevents.com/ 8 events/LIIC/2018/press. 50 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 3 4 highlights Removing Internal and external factors inhibit the World Impediments Bank Group’s development response to support to the World refugees, internally displaced persons, and host Bank Group’s communities. Development Approach External factors reviewed here include the unpredictability, complexity, and unique nature of each displacement situation; reduced local government capacity; macroeconomic and development challenges; and complex political economy factors. Internal factors include varying levels of active leadership in Country Management Units; the World Bank’s country engagement model, which, together with weak regional platforms, can constrain regional work; and limited Bank Group experience, time, and incentives needed to realize the development approach. 51 T H I S C H A P T E R identifies and discusses external and internal factors that impede the Bank Group’s efforts to respond with a development approach to situations involving forced displacement. Evidence is drawn predominantly from country case studies and triangulated interviews with Bank Group staff and external stakeholders. External Factors Forced displacement situations are unpredictable, dynamic, and prone to rapid and dramatic change, making it challenging to calibrate Bank Group interventions. Policy and security situations can change quickly, causing increases or decreases in displacement. For example, Ethiopia has received refugee inflows for nearly three decades from Somalia in the east, South Sudan in the west, and Sudan in the north. Ongoing conflict and instability make it difficult to predict when and from where refugees will enter Ethiopia next. Each forced displacement situation is different due to, among other things, a host country’s legal context for refugees or local-level issues and cultural-linguistic differences between host and displaced communities. In Uganda, the north of the country predominantly hosts refugees from South Sudan, while the west predominantly hosts refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo—two very different cultural-linguistic groups. Moreover, as host regions within the country, the west and north of Uganda differ in resources and levels of socioeconomic development. This illustrates why the Bank Group must design and tailor its interventions to unique and context-specific scenarios. Domestic political differences can also complicate the design and implementation of interventions. In Somalia, political feuds between the federal government and regional administrations make much of southern Somalia inaccessible. Thus, the World Bank’s engagement in Somalia has pragmatically focused on analytical work to investigate the drivers of persistent vulnerability (World Bank 2016g). Most forcibly displaced persons settle in urban areas (58 percent) and a majority (72 percent) in lagging regions within countries. Lagging regions have significant development challenges, hampering the medium- to longer-term economic focus of the development approach. Roughly 84 percent of the 68.5 million forcibly displaced persons worldwide live in developing and often low-income countries. So too, host countries and the specific places where forcibly displaced persons settle can experience significant development challenges apart from, and exacerbated by, displacement. These challenges include fiscal stress, low employment rates, and poor service delivery. Low government capacity, particularly in IDA countries, at both the national and subnational levels poses a challenge to World Bank efforts to address situations involving forced displacement. In standard practice, the World Bank uses national and decentralized governmental systems in its support. This approach builds country capacity, and government clients prefer it because it is more sustainable. However, it also requires readiness conditions without which this model is challenging. 52 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 4 At the local level, in case study countries in the Horn of Africa, municipal and other subnational administrations are under significant fiscal pressure and face capacity constraints in providing basic services to their own citizens, let alone for displaced populations for whom they will need to provide services. The World Bank will need to go beyond capacity building related to compliance with its fiduciary and safeguard policies and address capacity to target populations, deliver services, and monitor results. For example, the World Bank successfully supported capacity development for the Azerbaijan Social Fund for IDPs. In certain countries, such as Jordan and Turkey, the government has sufficient capacity, but other challenges arise. For example, in Jordan, the Syrian refugee crisis is straining the government’s fiscal capacity and affecting the core social contract that was largely based on the government’s ability to provide public sector jobs for many of its citizens and to subsidize prices for services and utilities (World Bank 2016l). In some situations, governments may not prioritize the forcibly displaced and may be unwilling to address associated issues because they view the phenomenon as temporary or do not consider it a core national concern. This can be the case for both IDPs and refugees. Acknowledging the protracted nature of forced displacement potentially opens a government to obligations, such as providing services to nonnational individuals, which can strain infrastructure and the government’s fiscal capacity. Governments may also resist supporting refugees unless the international community incentivizes them to do so. This is understandable; it is unfair to expect governments to take on broad problems that they have not created, and it points to the importance of further enhancing global compacts, recognizing the global public good being provided by host countries, improving burden sharing, and developing strategic partnerships. Moreover, governments may not want to acknowledge issues and challenges if the government itself has contributed to displacement of its own citizens. This was the case in Kenya, where the government enacted the Prevention, Protection, and Assistance to Internally Displaced Persons and Affected Communities Act in 2012 (five years after the postelection violence occurred) and did not track displacement, making IDPs invisible and impossible to integrate into local planning.1 Internal Factors The CMUs’ active leadership is important for driving engagements in situations involving forced displacement. CMUs, as the principal World Bank counterparts to national and subnational governments, convene partners and are the most knowledgeable regarding national and subnational contexts. Case studies and informant interviews identified variability in CMU responses to forced displacement: some CMUs engaged fully, whereas others avoided speaking of it directly to avoid potential conflict with government clients. As such, CMU buy-in and proactivity in addressing forced displacement often determines the nature and extent of the World Bank’s national engagement in forced displacement issues. CMUs are also critical for obtaining the commitment of Global Practices, and in achieving synergies and links across the 14 Global Practices and relevant and cross-cutting solution areas, such as FCV and Gender. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 53 Some internal challenges impede the Bank Group’s development response, such as processes, resources, time, and incentives. It takes additional resources and time to plan, collaborate, and build consensus on how to address forced displacement. For example, the road map to implement the government of Ethiopia’s nine pledges under the CRRF will require assessment and analysis to benchmark and guide the implementation and local capacity building, and a greater level of coordination among humanitarian and development actors to support both refugees and host communities. Interviews with Bank Group staff and external stakeholders identified inconsistencies between CMUs in prioritizing and incentivizing partnership efforts. The Bank Group’s new approach to situations of forced displacement requires unique experience, including a nuanced understanding of the local political economy, legal issues, employment rights, and cultural and economic integration challenges. A knowledgeable but small team within the FCV Global Theme has advanced the work, through strategic partnerships, workshops and training, and the Forced Displacement Community of Practice. Forced displacement focal points have been identified in each Global Practice. Although many staff are now involved in fragility issues,the depth of experience is still emerging.2 The regional dimension of many situations of forced displacement can challenge the World Bank’s country engagement model, although there are also other factors that make regional approaches difficult. The World Bank recognizes the regional character of displacement, but case studies show that projects predominantly implement country-focused solutions because CMUs work with individual government clients. The Syrian crisis illustrates the lack of World Bank mechanisms to accommodate regional and interregional coordination. Syrian refugees have fled to neighboring countries within the Middle East and North Africa (such as Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon), and in Europe and Central Asia, but regional and interregional cooperation is limited to informal information sharing. Other constraints to applying regional solutions include the weakness of regional platforms and organizations, and the recognition that although solutions may call for regional cooperation, the impacts of displacement are local and highly context- specific. Arrangements for stronger regional cooperation could be beneficial. The initial experience of the Regional Secretariat on Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa shows the potential and need for a regional approach to cross-country learning, information sharing, and monitoring. A regional plan is under development for the World Bank’s engagement in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, where there is room for stronger regional cooperation, especially sharing information on what works and what does not work in terms of refugee response. Regional cooperation can produce long-term development and promote durable solutions. These examples suggest that the World Bank could further fund regional organizations to promote regional development platforms that enhance cooperation. 1  or more information about the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre’s analysis of internally displaced persons F in Kenya, visit http://www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/files/2018-05/GRID%202018%20-%20Figure%20 Analysis%20-%20KENYA.pdf. 54 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 4 5 T H E E VA LUAT I O N ’ S O B J E C T I V E S are to assess the Bank Group’s approach and support to countries and subregions hosting forcibly displaced populations and to provide evidence- based lessons to inform the institution’s future role in this Conclusions and area. The assessment is aided by a theory of change—used Recommendations to benchmark the Bank Group’s engagements for FY16 and beyond—based on the Bank Group’s intended development approach to situations of forced displacement. The evaluation assesses how the Bank Group has leveraged its comparative advantages to support medium-term solutions for forcibly displaced people and host communities. Overall, the evaluation finds that between FY00 and FY18, the Bank Group’s strategies and analytical work evolved and moved in the direction of a development approach to forced displacement. Country strategies show growing awareness and understanding of the effects of forced displacement on forcibly displaced people and host communities. The Bank Group is viewed as a leader in innovative analytical work on private sector engagement in issues of forced displacement and analytical work that recommends solutions for creating economic opportunities, self-reliance, and resilience for both the forcibly displaced and their host communities. The World Bank has also made progress toward balancing support for the forcibly displaced and affected host communities. The World Bank understands that balanced support is an effective way to create cobenefits, mitigate the harmful effects of displacement, and create political goodwill through a win-win proposition. The World Bank has worked with partners to mobilize resources for programming for the forcibly displaced, help establish several multidonor trust funds, crowd-in financing through its individual projects, and support the creation of the GCFF and the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window. The GCFF and the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window are designed to benefit both displaced populations and host communities, underscoring the increased understanding that 55 host communities need to be supported, given that they provide a global public good by hosting refugees. At the same time, the World Bank has not fully leveraged its and other partners’ comparative advantages in data and analytical work to implement its intended development approach fully. The World Bank’s interventions could more systematically address the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced—including women and children—and their host communities. The World Bank’s forced displacement projects also need more specific indicators to monitor and evaluate effects on displaced populations. The World Bank is a trusted partner to client governments, who appreciate its long-term, sustainable development perspective, but the client government relationship may also pose challenges. The World Bank’s client-focused approach positions it well to engage in dialogue with governments, and it brings key ministries to the table that otherwise might not engage in forced displacement, such as ministries of finance and planning. However, the client focus also means that the World Bank may not leverage its comparative advantage in policy dialogue and, therefore, politically sensitive reforms may not be advanced. The World Bank may need to better leverage partnerships with humanitarian organizations and other development institutions. World Bank staff need to be aware of the donor landscape in each country and how the World Bank can best define and execute its role and comparative advantages. There is scope for the World Bank to further coordinate and selectively partner with key humanitarian and development actors and governments to ensure sector coherence and foster policy dialogue. The two new financing instruments—the GCFF and IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window—provide critical opportunities for policy dialogue and policy reform. The Bank Group’s comparative advantage in catalyzing the private sector to implement a development approach in situations of forced displacement has been difficult to leverage, and opportunities remain limited. External stakeholders agreed that the Bank Group could add value by creating knowledge and bringing partners together to explore mechanisms for private sector investment to support job creation for the forcibly displaced and host communities. Both external and internal factors hinder the implementation of the Bank Group’s development approach. The political economy surrounding displacement is perhaps the greatest challenge to realizing a development approach. Other external factors that hinder implementation include low government capacity; the dynamic, complex, and diverse contexts of forced displacement; macroeconomic and development challenges; and weak coordinating mechanisms. These factors may call for selective and gradual engagement depending on the context. Internal constraining factors include, among others, human capacity constraints, varying levels of leadership among CMUs, and the lack of incentives for collaboration given the time it takes to successfully coordinate such collaboration. The evaluation makes the following five recommendations for the Bank Group to fully leverage its comparative advantages to operationalize its intended development approach. 56 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Chapter 5 Recommendation 1. Intensify the use of analytical work related to conflict-induced forced displacement to inform policy dialogue, programming, and operational design. This could involve better aligning policy dialogue, programming, and the design of operations, with the context-specific understanding and medium-term solutions emerging from analytical work that focuses on institutional changes and the needs of the displaced—including women and children—and host communities. Recommendation 2. Improve monitoring and evaluation to demonstrate the intended development impacts on displaced populations and host communities—especially women and children. This may entail clearly defining monitorable outcome indicators; disaggregating these indicators, including by gender and age (as relevant), to monitor outcomes for forcibly displaced populations and host communities; and building capacity at the country level to target relevant populations and monitor results. Recommendation 3. Foster selective partnerships with key humanitarian and development agencies at the country level and promote stronger coordination with key agencies and the government to leverage the World Bank’s comparative advantages to operationalize the development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may guide the World Bank’s efforts to selectively use, sequence, or customize its instruments while supporting further sector coherence and policy dialogue with client governments. This may entail more systematically mapping the activities of humanitarian and other development agencies to identify respective areas and sectors of comparative advantage, customizing types of partnerships and coordination mechanisms to local contexts and partners’ mandates, and, among other factors, setting up clear expectations of country-level and sector-specific objectives and streamlined coordination arrangements to make coordination mechanisms and partnerships work better. Recommendation 4. Identify and catalyze private sector solutions to promote the self-reliance and resilience of the displaced and host communities. This may entail the Bank Group conducting analytical work to address knowledge and information gaps in how to engage effectively with private actors in the formal and informal sectors and in a diverse set of situations of forced displacement. This may also entail the World Bank, IFC, and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency identifying market opportunities and business models, adapting instruments, addressing weaknesses in the policy and regulatory frameworks, providing information to create business opportunities, and working with existing and new partners (such as philanthropic organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and social enterprises) who support private sector development. Recommendation 5. Ensure Country Management Units can effectively operationalize the World Bank Group’s development approach in situations of forced displacement. This may entail making sure Country Management Units have the required expertise and incentives to engage governments in sensitive dialogue; push for contextualized, medium-term programming for refugees and host communities; and invest in time-intensive coordination processes, both across the Bank Group and with other partners. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 57 bibliography Adhikari, Prakash. 2013. “Conflict-Induced Displacement, Understanding the Causes of Flight.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (1): 82–89. Barbelet, Veronique. 2017. “Livelihood Strategies of Central African Refugees in Cameroon.” Humanitarian Policy Group Working Paper, Overseas Development Institute, London. Barbelet, Veronique, Jessica Hagen-Zanker, and Dina Mansour-Ille. 2018. “The Jordan Compact: Lessons Learnt and Implications for Future Refugee Compacts.” Policy Briefing (February), Overseas Development Institute, London. CGD (Center for Global Development) and IRC (International Rescue Committee). 2017. Refugee Compacts: Ad- dressing the Crisis of Protracted Displacement. Final Report of the Forced Displacement and Development Study Group. Washington, DC: CGD. Charles, Sarah, Cindy Huang, Lauren Post, and Kate Gough. 2018. “Five Ways to Improve the World Bank Fund- ing for Refugees and Hosts in Low-Income Countries and Why These Dedicated Resources Matter More than Ever.” Washington, DC: Center for Global Development and International Rescue Committee. Christensen, Asger, and Niels Harild. 2009. “Forced Displacement: The Development Challenge.” Conflict, Crime, and Violence Issue Note (December), World Bank, Washington, DC. Del Carpio, Ximena Vanessa, and Mathis Christoph Wagner. 2015. “The Impact of Syrian Refugees on the Turkish Labor Market.” Policy Research Working Paper WPS 7402, World Bank Group, Washington, DC. Development Pathways. 2018. “Analysis of Refugee Vulnerability in Uganda and Recommendations for Improved Targeting of Food Assistance.” https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/65880. Edmond, Charlotte. 2017a. “84 Percent of Refugees Live in Developing Countries.” World Economic Forum, June 20. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/eighty-four-percent-of-refugees-live-in-developing-coun- tries/. ———. 2017b. “The Number of Displaced People in the World Just Hit a Record High.” World Economic Forum, June 20. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/there-are-now-more-refugees-than-the-entire-popula tion-of-the-uk. Engel, Stefanie, and Ana María Ibáñez. 2007. “Displacement Due to Violence in Colombia: A Household-Level Analysis.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 55 (2): 335–365. Ferris, Elizabeth. 2014. Changing Times: The International Response to Internal Displacement in Colombia. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. ———. 2016, “In Search of Commitments: The 2016 Refugee Summits.” Policy Brief 3, Kaldor Centre for Interna- tional Refugee Law, University of New South Wales, Sydney. GCFF (Global Concessional Financing Facility). 2017. Global Concessional Financing Facility: Operations Manual. Washington, DC: World Bank. Harild, Niels, Asger Christensen, and Roger Zetter. 2015. “Sustainable Refugee Return: Triggers, Constraints, and Lessons on Addressing the Development Challenges of Forced Displacement.” Global Program on Forced Displacement Issue Note Series, Working Paper 99618, World Bank, Washington, DC. Holzaepfel, Erica A., and Ethiopia Tadesse. 2015. “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Livelihoods Programs for Refu- gees in Ethiopia.” U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC. 58 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Bibliography Huang, Cindy, Sarah Charles, Lauren Post, and Kate Gough. 2018. “Tackling the Realities of Protracted Displace- ment: Case Studies on What’s Working and Where We Can Do Better.” Center for Global Development and International Rescue Committee Brief (April), Center for Global Development, Washington, DC. ICVA (International Council of Voluntary Agencies). 2018. The World Bank and Refugees: An ICVA Briefing Paper. Geneva: ICVA. IDMC (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre) and NRC (Norwegian Refugee Council). 2018. Global Report on Internal Displacement. Geneva: IDMC. IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2018. Kakuma as a Marketplace: A Consumer and Market Study of a Refugee Camp and Town in Northwest Kenya. Washington, DC: IFC. IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2017. “Jordan: Selected Issues.” IMF Country Report 17/232, IMF, Washington, DC. IRC (International Rescue Committee). 2017. Evidence Based Policy Review: The Jordan Compact. London: IRC. ———. 2018. Still in Search of Work—Creating Jobs for Syrian Refugees: An Update on the Jordan Compact. London: IRC. Jordan, Government of. 2016. “The Jordan Compact: A New Holistic Approach between the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the International Community to deal with the Syrian Refugee Crisis.” Reliefweb. https://relief web.int/report/jordan/jordan-compact-new-holistic-approach-between-hashemite-kingdom-jordan-and. ———. 2018. “Jordan Response Plan for the Syria Crisis 2018–2020.” PowerPoint presented at the 10th JRPSC Platform Meeting, Ministry of International Planning and Cooperation, Amman, Jordan, February 2018. Khoudour, David, and Lisa Andersson. 2017. “Assessing the Contribution of Refugees to the Development of Their Host Countries.” Background paper presented at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Centre’s Policy Dialogue on Migration and Development, “Embracing Development’s Complexity,” Paris, October 2. Macchiavello, Michela. 2003. “Forced Migrants as an Underutilized Asset: Refugee Skills, Livelihoods, and Achievements in Kampala, Uganda.” New Issues in Refugee Research Working Paper 95, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva. Nurkic, Azra Kacapor, Joanna De Berry, and Kamran Agamaliyev. 2013. Evaluation Report—Azerbaijan Internally Displaced Persons Youth Support Project, Component B: Youth Skills and Business Development. Wash- ington, DC: World Bank. Sanghi, Apurva, Harun Onder, and Varalakshmi Vemuru. 2016. “Yes” in My Backyard? The Economics of Refu- gees and Their Social Dynamics in Kakuma, Kenya. Washington, DC: World Bank. Stave, Svein Erik, and Solveig Hillesund. 2015. Impact of Syrian Refugees on the Jordanian Labour Market. Ge- neva: International Labour Organization and Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies. Uganda, Government of. 2018. Road Map for the Implementation of the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework in Uganda. Kampala, Uganda: Government of Uganda. UN (United Nations). 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Geneva: UN. UN (United Nations) and World Bank. 2018. Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Con- flict. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28337 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 59 UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2004. “Self-Reliance Strategy (1999–2003) for Ref- ugee Hosting Areas in Moyo, Arua, and Adjumani Districts, Uganda: Report of the Midterm Review 2004.” Reintegration and Local Settlement Section Mission Report 2004/03, UNHCR, Geneva. ———. 2016a. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. 2016, “New York Declaration for Refugees and Mi- grants” 2016/09, UNHCR, Geneva. ———. 2016b. “Syrian Refugees: A Snapshot of the Crisis in the Middle East and Europe.” http://syrianrefugees. eu/. ———. 2017a. Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2016. Geneva: UNHCR. ———. 2017b. Mapping of Education Facilities and Refugee Enrollment in Refugee Areas. Islamabad: UNHCR. ———. 2018a. Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2017. Geneva: UNHCR. ———. 2018b. “The Comprehensive Regional Protection and Solutions Framework in the North of Central Ameri- ca.” Global CRRF Update June 2018, UNHCR, Geneva. UNHCR and World Bank. 2015. “Eastern Africa—Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Afri- ca.” Report ACS14361, UNHCR and World Bank, Geneva and Washington, DC. Vemuru, Varalakshmi, Rahul Oka, Rieti Gengo, and Lee Gettler. 2016. Refugee Impacts on Turkana Hosts: A So- cial Impact Analysis for Kakuma Town and Refugee Camp Turkana County, Kenya. Washington, DC: World Bank. Verme, Paolo, Chiara Gigliarano, Christina Wieser, Kerren Hedlund, Marc Petzoldt, and Marco Santacroce. 2016. The Welfare of Syrian Refugees: Evidence from Jordan and Lebanon. Washington, DC: World Bank. Wake, Caitlin. 2016. “Turning a Blind Eye: The Policy Response to Rohingya Refugees in Malaysia.” Humanitarian Policy Group Working Paper (November), Overseas Development Institute, London. World Bank. 2002. “Uganda—Northern Uganda Social Action Fund Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD23885, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2005. “Lebanon—Emergency Primary Healthcare Restoration Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1205, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2006. “Bosnia-Herzegovina—Mostar Water Supply and Sanitation Project.” Independent Evaluation Group, Implementation Completion and Results Report Review ICRR12359, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2009. “Uganda Post-Conflict Land Policy and Administration Options: The Case of Northern Uganda.” Social Analysis 46110, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2011. World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2013a. “Jordan—Emergency Project to Assist Jordan to Partially Mitigate the Impact of Syrian Conflict.” Project Appraisal Document 78129-JO, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2013b. “Jordan—Emergency Services and Social Resilience Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD723, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2013c. Somalia—Interim Strategy Note (FY14–16). Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2014a. Jordan—Progress Report on the Country Partnership Strategy for FY12–15. Washington, DC: World Bank. 60 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Bibliography ———. 2014b. World Bank Group Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflicted-Affected States: An Indepen- dent Evaluation. Independent Evaluation Group. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://ieg.worldbankgroup. org/sites/default/files/Data/Evaluation/files/fcs_eval.pdf. ———. 2014c. “World Bank–Run Trust Fund Targets Lebanese Municipalities to Offset Spillovers of Syrian Crisis.” Press Release, September 12. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2014/09/12/world-bank- run-trust-fund-targets-municipalities-to-offset-spillovers-of-syrian-crisis. ———. 2014d. “Lebanon—Emergency National Poverty Targeting Program Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1030, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2014e. “Lebanon—Municipal Services Emergency Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1018, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2015a. “Jordan—Emergency Project to Assist Jordan Partially Mitigate the Impact of Syrian Crisis.” Imple- mentation Completion and Results Report ICR3278, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2015b. Azerbaijan. Systematic Country Diagnostic. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2015c. “Iraq—Emergency Operation for Development Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1485, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016a. Assessing Recovery and Development Priorities in Mali’s Conflict-Affected Regions. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016b. IDA18: IDA18 Overarching Theme: Toward 2030: Investing in Growth, Resilience, and Opportunity. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016c. Concessional Financing Facility for the MENA Region: Financial Intermediary Fund. An Informational Note. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016d. World Bank Group Engagement in Situations of Fragility, Conflict, and Violence. Independent Evaluation Group. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/Eval- uation/files/fcv-full.pdf. ———. 2016e. “Jordan—Second Programmatic Energy and Water Sector Reforms Development Policy Loan Proj- ect.” Project Appraisal Document PAD106648, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016f. “Lebanon—Support to Reaching All Children with Education (RACE 2) Program-for-Results Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD108014, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016g. Supporting Somalia’s Displaced. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016h. World Bank Annual Report 2016. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016i. World Bank Group Global Crisis Response Platform. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016j. Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience Global Practice Urban Strategy for Somalia. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016k. “Africa—Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1678, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016l. Jordan—Promoting Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity. Systematic Country Diagnostic. Washington, DC: World Bank. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 61 ———. 2016m. “Jordan—Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results Proj- ect.” Project Appraisal Document PAD108201, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016n. “Lebanon—Emergency National Poverty Targeting Program Project: Additional Financing Grant.” Project Paper PAD1850, Washington, DC. ———. 2016o. “Yemen—Emergency Crisis Response Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1797, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016p. “Yemen—Emergency Crisis Response Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2154, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017a. Forcibly Displaced: Toward a Development Approach Supporting Refugees, the Internally Dis- placed, and Their Hosts. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2017b. Report from the Executive Directors of the International Development Association to the Board of Governors: Additions to IDA Resources—Eighteenth Replenishment. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2017c. “Jordan—Education Reform Support Program-for-Results Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD121282, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017d. “Iraq—Promoting the Inclusion of Conflict-Affected Iraqi Youth Project.” Project Appraisal Document PP2278, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017e. “Jordan—Emergency Health Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2370, World Bank, Washing- ton, DC. ———. 2017f. “Jordan—Integrated Social Services for Vulnerable Youth Project: Grant.” Project Paper PP2372, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017g. “Jordan—Municipal Services and Social Resilience Project: Additional Financing.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2206, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017h. “Lebanon—Health Resilience Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2358, World Bank, Wash- ington, DC. ———. 2017i. “Lebanon—Roads and Employment Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2081, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017j. “Yemen—Emergency Crisis Response Project: Second Additional Financing and Restructuring.” Project Paper PAD2402, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017k. “Yemen—Emergency Health and Nutrition Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2412, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017l. “Yemen—Emergency Health and Nutrition Project: Second Additional Financing and Restructuring.” Project Paper PAD2493, Washington, DC: World Bank Group. ———. 2018a. “Lebanon—Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Pro- gram-for-Results Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD127011, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018b. “Iraq—Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2556, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018c. “Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results.” Implementa- tion Status and Results Reports, World Bank, Washington, DC. 62 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Bibliography ———. 2018d. “Ethiopia—Economic Opportunities Program Program-for-Results Project.” Project Appraisal Docu- ment PAD126766, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018e. Strategic Assessment: A Capital Investment Plan for Lebanon—Investment Opportunities and Re- forms. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2018f. “Cameroon—Community Development Program Support Project Response to Forced Displacement Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2780, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018g. “Cameroon—Education Reform Support Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2366, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018h. “Cameroon—Health System Performance Reinforcement Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2735, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018i. “Cameroon—Social Safety Net Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2744, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018j. “Iraq—Social Fund for Development Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2444, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018k. “Jordan—First Equitable Growth and Job Creation Programmatic Development Policy Financing.” Project Appraisal Document PAD124998, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018l. “Lebanon—Greater Beirut Public Transport Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2574, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018m. “Uganda—Integrated Water Management and Development Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2716, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018n. “Uganda—Response to Displacement Impacts Project: Additional Financing.” Project Paper PAD2962, World Bank, Washington, DC.. ———. 2018o. “Uganda—Support to Municipal Infrastructure Development Program Project: Additional Financing.” Program Paper 122547-UG, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018p. “Iraq—Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2556, World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank Group. 2015. Global Program on Forced Displacement Annual Progress Report January 2014—June 2015. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2016. “Forced Displacement and Development.” Report DC2016–0002, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2017a. The Toll of War: The Economic and Social Consequences of the Conflict in Syria. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2017b. 2016–2017 Annual Report: Global Concessional Financing Facility. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2017c. “A New Partnership at Work: UNHCR and the World Bank Group.” PowerPoint presented at the 68th session of the Executive Committee, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, October 4. World Bank and IMPACT Initiatives. 2017. “Jordan Emergency Services and Social Resilience Project (ESSRP).” Washington, DC: World Bank. Independent Evaluation Group | World Bank Group 63 World Bank and United Nations. 2013. Lebanon Roadmap of Priority Interventions for Stabilization: Strategy for Mitigating the Impact of the Syrian Crisis. Washington, DC: World Bank and United Nations. Zetter, Roger. 2014. “Reframing Displacement Crises as Development Opportunities.” Policy Brief prepared for the Global Initiative on Solutions “Roundtable on Solutions,” Copenhagen, April 2–3. Zetter, Roger, and Héloïse Ruaudel. 2016. “Refugees’ Right to Work and Access to Labor Markets—An As- sessment.” KNOMAD (Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development) Study, World Bank, Washington, DC. 64 World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement | Bibliography A PPE NDI X E S World Bank Group Support in Situations Involving Conflict-Induced Displacement A N I N D E PE N D E N T E VA LUAT I O N Appendix A. Methodological Approach Evaluation Questions The overall objective of the evaluation was to inform the World Bank Group’s support to situations of forced displacement and, more specifically, to • Assess the World Bank Group’s approach and support to countries and subregions hosting large forcibly displaced populations; and • Provide evidence-based lessons from past support to conflict-induced situations of forced displacement to inform the roles and positions of the World Bank Group in this area. The overarching objective and associated concerns motivated the development of three, multilayered lines of inquiry that guided the collection and analysis of data and the framing of findings and recommendations (box A.1). Box A.1. Evaluation Questions • How has the World Bank Group’s approach and support to situations of forced displacement evolved over time? To what extent has this been informed by strategic priorities? How has it incorporated lessons learned from experience to inform its scaling-up of support? • How and to what extent has the World Bank Group engaged with government, humanitarian, development partners, and the private sector? How has it positioned itself in relation to other partners in situations of forced displacement? • For selected countries and subregions, how has the World Bank Group addressed awareness, policy constraints, financing needs, and capacity constraints? How has the World Bank Group addressed the needs of internally displaced persons, refugees, returnees, and host communities in a balanced fashion? Overarching Approach and Evaluation Design Three core attributes characterize the evaluation design. First, the evaluation was grounded in a theory of change that sought to model how the strategic objectives of the World Bank Group’s support to situations of forced displacement were realized through the institution’s understanding of the displacement context and constraints faced by the displaced; its understanding of the broader landscape of 67 Appendix A Methodological Approach partners and its role in relation to other humanitarian, donor, and private sector stakeholders; its instruments (that is, financing, and analytical and advisory services); and its expertise (that is, convening power, policy dialogue, or leadership). Second, the evaluation followed a mixed-methods approach combining a range of methods for data collection and analysis and applied systematic triangulation to ensure the robustness of the findings. Third, the evaluation adopted a multilevel approach that explored the World Bank Group’s engagement with forced displacement at the global, selected subregions, country, and portfolio levels. A comprehensive protocol was at the heart of the evaluation design, drawing the various components together. This comprehensive protocol was applied, as relevant, in full or in part to the execution of the various evaluation components described in table A.1. The protocol provided focus and discipline and was designed to facilitate triangulation of findings derived from disparate data sources (for example, case studies, analytical reports, literature, portfolio, strategies, and interviews). The protocol itself was derived from the theory of change and key evaluation questions set out in the approach paper. It also reflected major concepts identified by key informant interviews during the evaluation scoping exercise. As such, it directly reflected the logic of the evaluation design. Because all data collection was filtered through the protocol, the tool supported team brainstorming sessions and cross-case analysis, that is, as a common frame of reference that supported comparative discussion and analysis. The protocol formed the basis for further refinement toward the identification of consistent thematic content (such as, for example, the importance of context for the World Bank Group in its engagement in forced displacement, the institution’s singular adoption of a client-centered approach, and the link between gender and displacement programming). This was achieved through the production of summary word tables and through a cross-walk exercise in which evidence from the various components was amassed against the protocol. This allowed for the association of collaborative evidence derived from the various components against each of the elements of the protocol and, as such, against each of the elements of the theory of change and against evaluation questions. This, in turn, allowed the evaluators to identify where there was thematic consistency or 68 Appendix A Methodological Approach critical mass that highlighted issues and themes for further analysis and attention. Theory of Change The evaluation’s theory of change (figure A.1) was constructed from recent World Bank reports, a review of World Bank Group support to forcibly displaced people and host communities, and the broader literature on forced displacement. It describes the World Bank Group’s intended development approach to situations of forced displacement. The theory of change assumes that the World Bank Group (i) understands the context specificity of displacement situations, including the vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced, the impact on host communities, and constraints faced by the displaced; (ii) uses financing to support forcibly displaced individuals and mitigate the impact on host communities, often through balanced support to both groups; (iii) stimulates policy dialogue; and (iv) understands the broader landscape of donor, government, private sector, and humanitarian partners, and coordinates with these actors to leverage its and others’ comparative advantages. As such, the theory of change—with a focus on the World Bank Group’s engagement and outcomes—is used as a tool for assessing how the World Bank Group has situated itself in a development response to forced displacement. The theory of change reflects the dynamic nature of World Bank Group engagement in this emerging area of development focus. The theory of change posits that the application of the World Bank Group’s interrelated activities— analytical and advisory services, financing and operations, policy dialogue, and strategic partnerships—determines the outcomes. The theory of change presents a visual depiction of the implicit assumptions of causal pathways between World Bank Group activities, comparative advantages, and outcomes. Analytical work is used to inform programming, operational design, and policy dialogue; through these, analytical work may lead to outcomes for both the forcibly displaced and government. Financing and operations should directly lead to outcomes for both the forcibly displaced and governments (especially when projects use national systems, which may improve capacity or have specific capacity building interventions). Policy dialogue can help raise government awareness, which can influence the type of financing and operations in the country (that is, policy reforms). Strategic partnerships can help coordinate 69 Appendix A Methodological Approach policy dialogue, financing, and analytical work and ultimately work toward outcomes for both the forcibly displaced and government. There are many interrelated channels and synergies implicit in the development approach—for example, it assumes that strategic partnerships will allow development and humanitarian actors to leverage their comparative advantages for a more coordinated, complementary, and efficient overall response. It also recognizes that there are internal and external factors that inhibit or enable. For example, the political leadership, legal standing, government capacity, and effectiveness of regional and country platforms and coordinating mechanisms affect the World Bank Group’s support and outcomes achieved. Similarly, internal factors such as Country Management Unit buy-in, experience, time, and personnel to build strategic partnerships facilitate the World Bank’s Group’s support, while the absence of these factors inhibits. 70 Appendix A Methodological Approach Figure A.1. Theory of Change Source: Independent Evaluation Group. 71 Appendix A Methodological Approach Table A.1 lists the evaluation components, and the text that follows elaborates on the content and function of each component in the evaluation. Table A.1. Evaluation Components Evaluation Component Description Background papers Three background papers were produced to inform the evaluation and the evaluators, as follows: • An analysis of the World Bank Group’s financial instruments in fragility, conflict, and violence settings; • Exploring the global landscape of actors and issues related to forced displacement; and • A geospatial analysis of the World Bank’s lending portfolio under forced displacement. Portfolio reviews Portfolio reviews, coded against the protocol, were undertaken as follows: • A systematic desk review and assessment of 103 World Bank projects relevant to forced displacement; • A systematic desk review of World Bank Group country partnership agreements, Country Engagement Notes, and Interim Strategy Notes from 2000–17 for the 60 countries that had a displaced population of more than 25,000 at the end of 2016; • A systematic desk review of World Bank Analytical and Advisory Services reports. A total of 161 reports were reviewed, and a purposive sample of 61 reports was subject to further coding; • A systematic desk review of previous Independent Evaluation Group evaluations. Interviews A total of 31 interviews were undertaken with key external stakeholders, and 20 interviews were undertaken with World Bank Group staff supplemented by more than 100 staff interviewed for case studies. The interview schedules were derived from the protocol. Background Papers Three background papers were prepared to support the evaluation: (i) an analysis of the World Bank Group’s financial instruments in fragility, conflict, and violence (FCV) settings; (ii) a global landscape of actors and issues related to refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs); and (iii) a geospatial analysis of the World Bank’s lending portfolio. These background papers provided 72 Appendix A Methodological Approach descriptive insights into evaluation questions and concepts. In addition, the papers were shared with all evaluation team members to underpin common understanding that infused the execution of other evaluation components. The authors of the papers also took part in team meetings and contributed to discussion that informed, for example, the country case studies and interviews. World Bank Group Financial Instruments in Fragility, Conflict, and Violence The purpose of the background paper on World Bank Group financial instruments in FCV settings was to provide an overview of World Bank Group financing instruments and operational policies specific to FCV countries and settings and situations of forced displacement, and to provide an analysis of the benefits and limitations to these policies and instruments with an emphasis on timeliness, targeting, and potential for development impact. Data for the paper were collected through a desk-based review of available documents from the World Bank Group and previous evaluations undertaken by the Independent Evaluation Group, supplemented by semistructured interviews with World Bank Group staff. Geospatial Analysis Geospatial mapping techniques were used to investigate the relationship between World Bank support to conflict-induced situations of forced displacement and the location of forcibly displaced populations using geocoded World Bank project data (the core forced displacement portfolio) and geocoded United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) refugee data that is not available publicly. The purpose of the analysis and paper were to provide evidence supporting strategic relevance of World Bank support to situations of conflict-induced forced displacement—for example, by examining the relationship between the number (and trend) of refugees in a host community and the magnitude of World Bank support. Unfortunately, data limitations made it impossible to provide an accurate picture of the World Bank’s operations in countries, especially in countries where refugees live outside of camps, limiting the usefulness of the paper. 73 Appendix A Methodological Approach Global Landscape The purpose of this paper was to provide an overview of forced displacement from the most recent academic and policy literature reviewed by an expert. The paper included discussion of (i) forced displacement and mixed migration, including a description of the current scale and scope of the problem, and the drivers of displacement; (ii) key historical moments, important agreements, and recent international meetings relating to conflict-induced forced displacement; and (iii) the development approach to forced displacement (including bridging the humanitarian gap, the role of the private sector, economic impact of forced displacement, and the major challenges in implementing a development approach). Portfolio Reviews Portfolio reviews were undertaken to inform and support the evaluation: (i) project portfolio of World Bank projects that provided support in situations of forced displacement (see the next section for a definition of projects included in the analysis); (ii) analytical and advisory services; and (iii) country strategies and key World Bank Group documents on forced displacement. Each review was conducted against elements of the protocol that was developed to govern the collection of data across all methods employed in the evaluation, and to facilitate the triangulation of evaluation findings in the final analysis. Portfolio Review of World Bank Projects Selection criteria and process. The portfolio review of World Bank projects had two objectives. The first objective was to determine the extent to which the World Bank has supported forced displacement; the second was to analyze the type of support the World Bank has provided to forcibly displaced persons and host communities. The World Bank supported 103 forced displacement projects between FY00 and FY17.1 The project portfolio is limited to projects financed through the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Association, and trust funds, including the Global Concessional 74 Appendix A Methodological Approach Financing Facility (GCFF). With this criterion set, the portfolio was identified through a multistage search process. Support for forced displacement is thematic rather than sector-specific. As such, there is no standardized coding for forced displacement projects in the World Bank system. To identify the portfolio, the evaluation employed the services of the Global Themes Knowledge Management Group Data and Text Analytics Unit, based in Chennai, India. The first stage of the exercise involved a multiple keyword search of all World Bank operations through the Operations Portal.2 The search identified 180 projects, with search terms appearing in either the project’s abstract, name, development objectives, components, or indicators. The evaluation team conducted a second multiple keyword search. The team searched all World Bank operations in the Operations Portal and the image bank using a similar set of terms.3 This second search looked for keywords that appeared anywhere in the project documents (not just in the abstract, name, development objectives, components, or indicators). The search identified 363 projects. The team then conducted a manual review of key project documents for the 363 projects to identify false positives. For example, the term “involuntary displacement” often referred to resettlement owing to safeguard issues. The team omitted these projects from the sample because this evaluation focused on conflict-driven forced displacement. A total of 196 projects were reviewed and classified as forced displacement projects.4 The projects were analyzed further to determine whether the support directly or indirectly targeted forcibly displaced populations or host communities affected by forced displacement. The objective of this classification was to establish a portfolio of direct support forced displacement projects, defined as projects that target refugees, IDPs, returnees, or host communities either in the project development objective, the list of targeted beneficiaries, or through a specific activity in a project’s components or subcomponents. The criteria used to determine direct support were as follows: • Refugee. A project provided direct support if it either (i) explicitly named refugees as receiving a specific project intervention, or (ii) the presence of refugees within a community was used as criterion for project or intervention site selection. 75 Appendix A Methodological Approach • IDP. A project provided direct support if it either (i) explicitly named IDPs as receiving a specific project intervention, or (ii) the presence of IDPs within a community was used as criterion for project or intervention site selection. • Returnee. A project provided direct support if returnees themselves were receiving the specific project intervention. Project interventions targeting rehabilitation or reconstruction to support the eventual return of refugees or IDPs were not included as direct support to forced displacement. • Host community. A project provided direct support if a project intervention was designed to explicitly alleviate stress experienced by a community caused by hosting forcibly displaced persons. The final core forced displacement projects portfolio consisted of 103 projects providing direct support to refugees, IDPs, returnees, host communities, or a combination those. Ninety-nine direct support projects were in 41 countries, and another 4 were regional projects in Sub-Saharan Africa. The 103 projects directly supported refugees (31), IDPs (58), returnees (45), and host communities (46). Generally, projects targeted more than one affected population. Figure A.2 presents the distribution of projects by targeted population. The portfolio review also identified 73 projects that provided indirect support to 33 countries. Fifty-four of the 73 projects providing indirect support were approved between FY00 and FY09. Indirect support was classified into three categories: reconstruction and rehabilitation (55 percent); conflict-, peace-, or stability-related (5 percent); or development project with potential spillover effects (40 percent). These projects were not included in the analysis, but they highlight the nature of the World Bank’s continuing role in reconstruction and rehabilitation of conflict- or war-torn countries. 76 Appendix A Methodological Approach Figure A.2. Distribution of the World Bank Forced Displacement Project Portfolio, by Target Population Source: Independent Evaluation Group. Note: Projects also supported refugees and returnees (n = 1), refugee, IDP, and returnee (n=2), and refugee, IDP, returnee, and host community (n = 3). IDP = internally displaced person. Coding and analysis. A structured review was conducted of the 100 forced displacement projects using the protocol designed to inform the evaluation questions. Data were extracted from project appraisal documents, staff memoranda, technical appendixes, project papers, Implementation Completion and Results Reports, Implementation Completion and Results Report Reviews, and Project Performance Assessment Reports on key contextual factors, strategic priorities, analytical work cited as underpinning interventions, joint assessments, lessons learned about past support for the forcibly displaced that were incorporated into the current operation’s design, the type of intervention supported (for example, health, education, income generation, infrastructure, and so on), private sector involvement (for-profit and not-for project, for example, nongovernmental organizations [NGOs]), gender programming, the level of government with which the World Bank engaged, donor coordination, planned evidence generation, and the results framework. A summary paper was produced highlighting significant trends and major findings. 77 Appendix A Methodological Approach Review of case study country portfolios. The team conducted a deep dive of the portfolio for case study countries to check the robustness of the portfolio identification process. For those case study countries hosting large IDP populations, a review of each country’s entire lending portfolio (FY00–17) was carried out to assess the extent to which operations not identified and included as direct or indirect support might have benefited IDPs (for example, by examining the geographical focus of the operation relative to the geographical concentration of IDPs). A similar review was conducted for refugee countries where the majority of refugees live among the host community. Portfolio Review of Analytical and Advisory Services Review Selection criteria and process. Information and Technology Services staff in Chennai, India supported the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) in carrying out a search of the Operations Portal 2000–17 analytical reports and operations based on an automatic search of keywords related to forced displacement provided by the evaluation team. In addition, the evaluation team conducted a second layer of keyword search using all World Bank Group internal systems, including image bank, Operations Portal, and the Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development (KNOMAD) website, as well as reviewing reference lists in reports to find additional reports that did not come up during either stage of the keyword search. Based on these efforts, 173 potentially relevant analytical reports were identified. Because 12 of the 173 reports identified were either dropped or cancelled, the final universe of analytical reports for review was reduced to 161. Coding and analysis. Each of the 161 reports was screened to identify (i) reference to IDPs, refugees, host communities, or returnees; (ii) type of report; and (iii) country, regional, or global focus. In a purposefully selected sample of the analytical work (61 of 161) that was proportional to the analytical work conducted in each region (or world classification), additional material was coded consistent with the content for the portfolio review and case study questions, that is, with reference to the protocol. A summary paper was produced highlighting major findings. 78 Appendix A Methodological Approach Portfolio Review of International Finance Corporation Projects Selection criteria and analysis process. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) portfolio of investment and advisory services was determined in conjunction with the fragility, conflict, and violence team in IFC, IFC regional strategists, and IFC country directors (for case study countries). A review of the investment and advisory service portfolios for FY00–18 was undertaken for Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Turkey, and Uganda (as relevant). The review resulted in four investments and 12 advisory services. Portfolio Review of Country Strategy and Key Documents Selection criteria and analysis process. Using World Development Indicators (based on UNHCR and UNRWA data), the evaluation identified 60 countries with conflict-induced displaced populations of at least 25,000 or representing at least 0.02 percent of the host community population in 2000, 2009, and 2016. The evaluation team identified and reviewed all strategy-related documents at the country level (Country Assistance Strategies, Country Partnership Strategies, Country Partnership Frameworks, Country Engagement Notes, and Interim Strategy Notes) for each of the 60 client countries identified, to assess how the World Bank Group’s approach to forced displacement may or may not have evolved and how regional and country solutions have been advanced with partners. Coding and analysis. All strategy-level documents with substantive reference to forced displacement (that is, where the World Bank Group’s country strategy supported a project or analytical work to address forced displacement) were coded against the protocol. The exercise synthesized material to generate insights into the World Bank Group’s role and the relevance of its response for IDPs, refugees, returnees, and host communities, was consistent with the questions used with the review of operations, Advisory Services and Analytics, and case studies. A summary paper was produced highlighting major findings. Review of Past Independent Evaluation Group Evaluations The team reviewed previous IEG evaluations (2000–18) to identify findings relevant to forced displacement. This summary review was not conducted with 79 Appendix A Methodological Approach reference to the protocol that governed all other components of the evaluation because it would not have been appropriate to the task. Instead, a short paper was produced identifying reference to and lessons from IEG evaluations in relation to forced displacement. The review found limited relevant material, reflecting the relatively limited engagement with the phenomenon overall. However, certain evaluations and reports, such as those addressing FCV and fragile and conflict-affected situations, country engagement models (SCD), instruments (the 17th Replenishment of IDA, Project Performance Assessment Reports, and so on), the World Bank’s response in emergency or crisis situations (Global Food Response and Natural Disaster Response) or Country Performance Evaluation (Uganda) yielded some insights that provided useful background and perspective for this evaluation. Case Studies Selection criteria and process. A purposive sampling strategy was employed for selection of case studies clustered in two subregions with large populations of conflict-induced forcibly displaced persons: the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda), and the Syrian Refugee Crisis (Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey). The two situations were selected based on the following criteria: (i) presence of both refugees and IDPs, (ii) usage of different instrumental modalities of support, and (iii) countries with progressive and restrictive policies concerning forcibly displaced persons. IEG also conducted two Project Performance and Assessment Reports, allowing for two additional case studies of countries with IDPs (Azerbaijan and Colombia). The criteria for selecting the closed operations were direct support for IDPs (not just the closed operation examined in the Project Performance Assessment Report) across different regions. This resulted in 12 case studies. In selecting the case study countries in the subregions, the evaluation team sought to balance the number of countries under assessment in each. That meant, for example, omitting certain countries (such as Djibouti in favor of Somalia and South Sudan, which offered more for IDPs and country of origin perspective). The World Bank Group is not currently engaged in certain countries, such as Eritrea. Other countries, such as Jordan and Kenya, could not support a mission at the time of the evaluation. Finally, the team also sought to concentrate its focus 80 Appendix A Methodological Approach on countries that hosted significant numbers of refugees, such as Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Turkey, and Uganda. Ultimately, the selection of country cases was pragmatic to achieve balance and reflect the dynamic nature of the phenomenon of forced displacement. Field-based countries were selected based on the logistic feasibility of mission travel within the limited time frame to collect data. Collection and analysis process. Six field-based analyses and five desk-based analysis in countries of interest were employed and used multiple sources of evidence: interviews with government officials (field), World Bank Group staff (field and desk), officials from partnering organizations (field), representatives of displaced (field), and experts (desk), relevant documents (including existing evaluations, both field and desk), World Bank Group analytical reports and strategies (country or regional, both field and desk), and World Bank operations (field and desk). The inquiry, whether field or desk based, was undertaken based on the protocol that was based on the theory of change and key evaluation questions (see appendix E). As with other components of the evaluation (portfolio review, country strategy review, review of analytical reports, and interviews), the findings from the cases were reviewed to detect patterns, similarities, and differences. Findings from countries within a subregion were compared to identify patterns regarding how the World Bank Group supported regional or subregional financing, analytical work, and policy dialogue, or how it engaged with existing regional platforms. The case study findings were also subject to a cross-walk exercise based on the protocol to collate and associate case study findings with findings from the other evaluation components. Interviews External Stakeholder Interviews Selection criteria and process. In consultation with the World Bank Group’s Forced Displacement Team in the FCV Global Theme and IFC’s FCV team, the evaluation team identified 30 external stakeholders whose engagement with the World Bank Group related to situations of forced displacement. The list of external interviewees to be contacted grew to 40 through snowball sampling as interviews progressed and as interviewees nominated other informants who 81 Appendix A Methodological Approach could provide critical insights on the World Bank Group’s work and role regarding forced displacement. Collection and analysis process. Forty e-mail requests for interviews were sent to representatives of organizations, including those in UN institutions (humanitarian and development), multilateral development banks, regional banks, bilateral donors, major humanitarian NGOs (such as Norwegian Refugee Council and Immigrant and Refugee Resource Collaborative), and think tanks. Ultimately, 31 interviews were conducted with external stakeholders. The interviews followed the standard interview protocol developed for the case studies, with emphasis on questions that focused on how the World Bank’s approach to forced displacement has evolved over time, focal areas of the interviewee’s institution and its comparative advantages, how the World Bank positions itself in relation to others (with a specific emphasis on the World Bank’s comparative advantage compared with other organizations operating in the field), and the identification of factors that hamper or facilitate the World Bank Group in advancing in this space. Detailed, written notes for the 31 stakeholders interviewed were taken and systematically analyzed to derive themes and key messages from the interviews. Internal Stakeholder Interviews Selection criteria and process. A purposeful sample of World Bank Group staff was selected among key forced displaced counterparts in the FCV Global Theme; KNOMAD; the forced displaced focal point in the Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience Global Practice; and operational perspectives among task team leaders who managed projects or analytic and advisory activities with forced displaced components.5 IEG identified potential interviewees from the portfolio of projects and analytic and advisory activities developed for this evaluation. The purposeful sample selected interviewees that had experience in forced displacement hot spots that were not covered by the 11 case studies undertaken for the evaluation. World Bank Group staff who were interviewed provided perspectives on the institution’s engagement in forced displacement in a diverse set of countries: Bangladesh, Cameroon, Chad, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Republic of Yemen, Sri Lanka, and Ukraine. The Global Practice or Global Theme experience of the task team leaders interviewed included Sustainable Development; Social Protection; Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience (Urban); 82 Appendix A Methodological Approach Agriculture; Fragility, Conflict, and Violence; Gender; and Education, as well as IFC. Collection and analysis process. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 15 internal stakeholders across the World Bank between January and March 2018. The interviews followed the standard interview protocol developed for the case studies, with an emphasis on questions that focused on how the World Bank’s approach to forced displacement has evolved over time, how the World Bank positions itself with others (with a specific emphasis on the World Bank’s comparative advantage compared with other organizations operating in the field), and the identification of factors that hamper or facilitate the World Bank Group in advancing in this space. Detailed, written notes for each interview were taken and systematically analyzed to derive themes and main messages from the interviews that were triangulated with the other sources of evidence. Ensuring the Validity of Findings As noted previously, the evaluation used a mixed-methods, multilevel approach (global, subregional, country, and portfolio) that centered on a protocol for data collection that was primarily based on the theory of change and the evaluation questions set out in the approach paper. The evaluation drew on multiple sources of evidence derived from country case studies, country strategies and relevant documents, portfolio, analytical and advisory services, internal and external interviews, and background papers. Table A.2 illustrates how the evidence from the multiple sources were focused and combined to answer specific evaluation questions at four levels: global, subregional, country, and portfolio, noting that the content in each case had been collected (through execution of one of the evaluation components) and collated (together, as relevant, with evidence from other sources) under the protocol to identify areas for further cross-cutting analysis. 83 Appendix A Methodological Approach Table A.2. Mapping Sources of Evaluation Questions Evaluation Questions, Level of Analysis Global Subregion Country Portfolio Evaluation Question 1: How has the World Bank Group’s BP, KII, P, ASA, BP, P, ASA, P, ASA, BP, KII approach and support to CPF, KII, CS BP, KII, CS, situations of forced displacement CPF evolved over time? To what extent has this been BP, KII, ASA, KII, CS ASA, KII, P, ASA, KII informed by strategic priorities? CPF CS, CPF How has it incorporated lessons BP, CPF, P, ASA, CS, P, ASA, P, ASA, KII learned from experience to KII CPF CS, CPF inform its scaling-up of support? Evaluation Question 2: How and to what extent has the BP, KII P, ASA, KII, P, ASA, KII World Bank Group engaged with CS government, humanitarian, development partners, and the private sector? How has it positioned itself in BP, KII P, ASA, KII, P, ASA, KII relation to other partners in CS situations of forced displacement? Evaluation Question 3: For selected countries and CS, KII CS, KII, subregions, how has the World ASA, CPF Bank Group addressed awareness, policy constraints, financing needs, and capacity constraints? How has the World Bank Group P, ASA, KII, CS, ASA, P, ASA, KII addressed the needs of IDPs, CS KII, CPF refugees, returnees, and host communities in a balanced fashion? Source: Independent Evaluation Group. Note: ASA = Advisory Services and Analytics; BP = background paper; CPF = country strategies and relevant documents; CS = country case studies; IDP = internally displaced person; KII = key internal and external interviews; P = portfolio. In collecting and analyzing data, the evaluation team consistently used the protocol previously referenced. The protocol was implemented in a cohesive manner that allowed for the triangulation of the sources of evidence rather than 84 Appendix A Methodological Approach independent inquiries of each source of evidence (Datta 1997; Hesse and Johnson 2015; Yardley 2009; Patton 2015). Given the important subregional and multicountry dimension, the data analysis process compared findings to corroborate (or not) the displacement experiences across countries and subregions. Evaluation design balanced the trade-off between breadth of coverage (as a basis for generalizability) and depth of analysis (as a basis for understanding contextual factors), in the following way: For each level (global, regional- subregional, country, and portfolio) and each evaluation question, sources of evidence collected consistent evidence to enable depth of understanding (for example, semistructured interviews, case studies, and strategy review). To support generalizability of the evaluation findings, the evaluation assessed the extent of convergence across multiple sources of evidence. Sources of evidence were cross-checked with individual methodological components. For example, the country case studies were informed by multiple sources interviews—for example, broader internal and external interviews, field interviews during mission (for example, government, partners, NGOs, and think tanks), strategies, and portfolio review. These multiple sources were held in tension to validate or otherwise emerging themes, and each country case study involved the production of a report under the relevant headings of the protocol. Evidence across components triangulated through a cross-walk exercise that involved the collation of the various sources of evidence against relevant elements of the protocol. The collated material was subject to further analysis through the construction of word tables and team discussion in a process of iterative triangulation that sought to identify critical mass and multiple sources to support emerging findings. Where there was evident convergence supported by multiple sources, the evaluation referenced this in its findings. However, there were areas of divergence given, for example, the emerging nature of the forced displacement agenda from a development perspective and the influence of context and client on World Bank Group engagement. The team noted these and used them, as appropriate, to illustrate the dynamic and evolving nature of World Bank Group engagement in forced displacement. 85 Appendix A Methodological Approach Limitations The findings and conclusions reached by this evaluation should be interpreted with reference to the strengths of the evidence gathered. Given that evidence across all evaluation components and all sources was collected and analyzed in a consistent and structured manner, the evaluation can claim confidence in its findings and lessons learned. However, the findings and conclusions of the evaluation should also be read with reference to the following limitations that applied to the evaluation effort. Time and timing. The purpose of the evaluation was to inform the World Bank Group’s engagement in situations of forced displacement and the 18th Replenishment of IDA (IDA18) midterm review. Thus, the evaluation had to be completed within a very short time frame, which limited what could be done and the scope of the evaluation. In addition, the timing of the evaluation meant that key instruments to tackle forced displacement (GCFF and the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities) were, from an implementation perspective, in their infancy, making it impossible to reflect on outcomes or, for the IDA18 Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities, impossible to reflect even on outputs. Instead, the evaluation reflected on aspects of design and process that may have value in future deliberations. Evaluation scope. This evaluation focuses on conflict-induced displacement, which omits other World Bank Group experiences in displacement, including displacement caused by nonconflict factors such as climate change, natural disasters, disease pandemics, or food insecurity. It is possible that experience from the World Bank Group’s support in these instances may be relevant to conflict-induced forced displacement and vice versa, but the evaluation did not examine other drivers of displacement. Reflecting the necessary trade-off between depth and breadth of inquiry given the time and budget restrictions, there was a trade-off in relation to the depth of coverage that the evaluation realizes in covering regions and subregions. Selection of country cases. As noted previously, even within the subregions selected for analysis, it was not possible to examine all countries impacted respectively by the Syrian crisis, nor in the Horn of Africa. In certain instances 86 Appendix A Methodological Approach (for example, the Syrian Arab Republic), it was not possible to undertake a study given limited World Bank involvement in the past and the current conflict. Given the ongoing conflict in Somalia, Sudan, and South Sudan, desk reviews were undertaken, which may not be as robust as conducting a mission. The team sought to achieve balance and coverage (in numbers of the displaced) and included countries such as Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and Uganda, where there are large numbers of displaced persons, but omitted countries such as Djibouti because other countries provided better options regarding World Bank engagement and the extent of the forced displacement phenomenon. Overall, the team achieved a balanced selection. A limitation is the coverage of subregions. Available evaluative evidence. The evaluation engaged in extensive work to unearth the forced displacement portfolio (2000–17) for analysis. The sum of projects identified was 101, many of which are ongoing. Closed and evaluated projects that address forced displacement are limited to 60 projects. The absence of hard, prior evaluative assessment at the project level is uncommon, though not unique. In mitigation, the evaluation team placed a heavy emphasis on developing mechanisms and means to secure the collection and analysis of data across multiple sources to ensure a robust evidence base. 1 The portfolio review was based on approval fiscal year. The portfolio review was finalized as of March 23, 2018. Since FY18 data are incomplete, the evaluation based its findings from the portfolio on FY00–17 data, complemented with FY18 and FY19 data from case study countries, GCFF- and IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window-funded projects, and projects singled out in interviews (n = 21). 2The search terms used in the Operations Portal search were: camp, refugee, forced displacement, internally displaced, internal displacement, host, host community, hosting country, returnee, displaced, GCFF, CFF, GPFD, UNHCR, IDP, SPBF, involuntary, involuntary displacement, internally displaced person, internally displaced people, host communities, host communities’, refugees, Concessional Financing Facility, Global Concessional Financing Facility, camps, State and Peacebuilding Fund, humanitarian to development, emergency concessional financing, and Global Partnership for Forced Displacement. 87 Appendix A Methodological Approach 3The search terms used in the second multiple keyword search were: camp, camps, refugee, refugees, host, host community, host communities, IDP, IDPs, internally displaced persons, internally displaced people, internally displaced, internal displacement, involuntary, involuntary displacement, displaced, returnee, UNHCR, State and Peacebuilding Fund, postconflict, and forced displacement. Searching for “postconflict” and either “displaced” or “refugee” identified projects that indirectly supported forced displacement. 4The results of these searches were compared with a portfolio of forced displacement projects provided to the Independent Evaluation Group by the Fragility, Conflict, and Violence Global Theme. The search of the Operations Portal and image bank identified all projects from the Fragility, Conflict, and Violence Global Theme’s list. 5These interviews were in addition to the interviews of task team leaders associated with country case studies. 88 Appendix A Methodological Approach 89 Appendix B. Countries with Refugees or IDPs and World Bank Engagement Refugee IDP Total Refugees Conflict IDPs (% of total (% of total World Bank (no.) (no.) population) population) (no.) Country Direct Indirect Country 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 Strategy Projects Projects ASA Afghanistan — 37 59,770 297,000 1,553,000 — 0.0 0.2 1.10 4.50 Yes Yes Yes Yes Algeria 169,656 94,137 94,220 — 2,500 0.5 0.3 0.2 — 0.00 No No No No Armenia 280,591 3,607 17,873 8,400 8,400 9.1 0.1 0.6 0.30 0.30 No Yes No No Azerbaijan 287 1,642 1,183 586,000 582,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.50 6.00 Yes Yes Yes Yes Bangladesh 21,627 228,586 276,198 426,000 426,000 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.30 0.30 Yes Yes No No Bosnia and Herzegovina 38,152 7,132 5,256 114,000 98,000 1.0 0.2 0.1 3.00 2.80 Yes Yes Yes No Burkina Faso 696 543 32,546 — 700 0.0 0.0 0.2 — 0.00 No No No No Burundi 27,136 24,967 57,462 100,000 59,000 0.4 0.3 0.5 1.20 0.60 Yes Yes Yes No Cameroon 43,680 99,957 375,393 — 177,000 0.3 0.5 1.6 — 0.80 Yes Yes No No Central African Republic 55,661 27,047 12,107 162,000 412,000 1.5 0.6 0.3 3.70 9.00 Yes Yes Yes Yes Chad 17,692 338,495 391,235 168,000 108,000 0.2 2.9 2.7 1.50 0.70 Yes Yes Yes No Colombia 239 196 221 4,916,000 7,246,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.80 14.90 Yes Yes Yes Yes Congo, Dem. Rep. of 332,509 185,809 451,947 1,900,000 2,230,000 0.7 0.3 0.6 3.00 2.80 Yes Yes Yes No Congo, Republic of 123,190 111,411 46,439 7,800 33,000 3.8 2.6 0.9 0.20 0.60 No Yes No No Côte d’Ivoire 120,691 24,604 1,377 342,000 301,000 0.7 0.1 0.0 1.70 1.30 Yes Yes Yes No Djibouti 23,243 12,111 17,678 — — 3.2 1.4 1.9 — — Yes No No No Ecuador 1,602 116,557 102,848 — — 0.0 0.8 0.6 0 0 No No No No 89 Appendix B Countries with Refugees or IDPs and World Bank Engagement Refugee IDP Total Refugees Conflict IDPs (% of total (% of total World Bank (no.) (no.) population) population) (no.) Country Direct Indirect Country 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 Strategy Projects Projects ASA Egypt, Arab Rep. 6,840 94,406 213,500 — 78,000 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.00 0.10 No No No No Ethiopia 197,959 121,886 791,616 350,000 258,000 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.40 0.30 Yes Yes Yes Yes Georgia 7,620 870 2,107 240,000 208,000 0.2 0.0 0.1 6.00 5.60 Yes Yes Yes Yes Guatemala 720 131 295 — 257,000 0.0 0.0 — — 1.50 No No No Yes Guinea 427,206 15,325 5,057 — — 4.8 0.1 0.0 — — No Yes Yes No Honduras 12 19 11 — 190,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 2.10 No No No No Iran, Islamic Rep. 1,868,000 1,070,488 979,435 — — 2.8 1.5 1.2 — — No No No No Iraq 127,787 35,218 261,882 2,764,000 3,035,000 0.5 0.1 0.7 9.20 8.20 Yes Yes Yes Yes Jordan 1,610,638 2,434,489 2,860,669 — — 31.6 35.7 30.3 0.00 0.00 Yes Yes No Yes Kenya 206,106 358,928 451,077 250,000 138,000 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.60 0.30 No Yes No Yes Lebanon 382,744 476,053 1,476,618 90,000 12,000 11.8 11.4 24.6 2.20 0.20 Yes Yes Yes Yes Liberia 69,315 6,952 18,973 23,000 — 2.4 0.2 0.4 0.60 — Yes Yes No No Libya 11,543 9,005 9,301 — 304,000 0.2 0.1 0.1 — 4.80 No No No No Malaysia 50,487 66,137 92,209 — — 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.00 0.00 No No No No Mali 8,412 13,538 17,510 — 37,000 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.00 0.20 Yes Yes No Yes Mauritania 350 26,795 74,117 — — 0.0 0.8 1.7 — — No No No Yes Mexico 18451 1235 6153 8000 311000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.20 No No No No Myanmar — — — 470000 644000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.90 1.20 No No No No Namibia 27,263 7,163 1,747 — — 1.4 0.3 0.1 — — No No No No 90 Appendix B Countries with Refugees or IDPs and World Bank Engagement Refugee IDP Total Refugees Conflict IDPs (% of total (% of total World Bank (no.) (no.) population) population) (no.) Country Direct Indirect Country 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 Strategy Projects Projects ASA Nepal 129,237 108,461 25,244 60,000 50,000 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.20 0.20 No Yes No No Niger 58 325 166,084 11,000 136,000 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.10 0.70 No No Yes No Nigeria 7,270 9,127 1,347 — 1,955,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.10 No Yes Yes No Pakistan 2,001,466 1,740,711 1,352,551 1,230,000 464,000 1.4 1.0 0.7 0.70 0.20 No Yes Yes No Peru 687 1,108 1,590 150,000 62,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.50 0.20 No No No No Russian Federation 26,265 4,880 228,936 80,000 19,000 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.10 0.00 No No No No Rwanda 28,398 54,016 156,055 — — 0.4 0.5 1.3 0.00 0.00 No Yes Yes No Serbia — 86,351 36,508 225,000 — 0.0 1.2 0.5 3.10 0.00 Yes Yes No No Somalia 558 1,815 11,559 1,500,000 1,107,000 0.0 0.0 0.1 12.80 7.70 Yes No No Yes South Africa 15,063 47,974 90,958 — — 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.00 0.00 No No No Yes South Sudan — — 262,548 — 1,854,000 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.00 15.20 No Yes Yes Yes Sri Lanka 16 251 597 400,000 44,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.00 0.20 Yes Yes Yes No Sudan 414,928 186,292 421,454 4,900,000 3,300,000 1.5 0.6 1.1 14.60 8.30 Yes Yes Yes Yes Syrian Arab Republic 390,989 1,526,575 562,811 433,000 6,326,000 2.4 7.3 3.1 2.10 34.30 No No No Yes Tanzania 680,862 118,731 281,498 — — 2.0 0.3 0.5 — — No No No Yes Thailand 104,965 105,297 106,426 — 35,000 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.00 0.10 No No No No Turkey 3,103 10,350 2,869,379 1,000,000 1,108,000 0.0 0.0 3.6 1.40 1.40 Yes Yes No Yes Uganda 236,622 127,345 940,815 435,000 53,000 1.0 0.4 2.3 1.30 0.10 Yes Yes No Yes Ukraine 2,951 7,334 3,252 — 1,653,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 — 3.70 Yes No No Yes 91 Appendix B Countries with Refugees or IDPs and World Bank Engagement Refugee IDP Total Refugees Conflict IDPs (% of total (% of total World Bank (no.) (no.) population) population) (no.) Country Direct Indirect Country 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 2000 2009 2016 2009 2016 Strategy Projects Projects ASA Uzbekistan 38,350 555 26 3,400 — 0.2 0.0 0.0 — — No No No No Venezuela, RB 132 201,313 172,017 — — 0.0 0.7 0.5 — — No No No No West Bank and Gaza 1,428,891 1,885,188 2,158,274 160,000 193,000 48.9 50.9 47.4 4.30 4.20 No Yes Yes No Yemen, Republic of 60,545 170,854 269,763 175,000 1,974,000 0.3 0.7 1.0 0.80 7.20 Yes Yes Yes No Zambia 250,940 56,785 29,338 — — 2.4 0.4 0.2 — — No Yes No No Note: ASA = Advisory Services and Analytics; IDP = internally displaced person. 92 Appendix C. World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P166120 Ethiopia IDA18 Refugee Advisory Africa Ethiopia Policy: Policy note on transition from Refugees, IDPs, and host Support and Analytics humanitarian aid to development Communities P164952 Niger and Chad IDA18 Refugee Africa Chad and Policy: Policy note Refugees Analytical and Advisory Support Niger P164491 Regional Study on Mixed Migration Africa South Africa Regional assessment Refugees and Forced Displacement into Southern Africa P163928 Mauritania Returning Refugees and Africa Mauritania Other: report: sustainable livelihoods Refugees and host communities Host Communities Sustainable Livelihoods Assessment P163641 ¨Children on the move – Rights for Africa Regional Other: report: HH migration choices, Refugees Results¨- A Human Rights Based Stocktaking of good practices Approach to HD Challenges for Displaced Children in West Africa P163501 Social Protection Policy and Forced Africa Central Other: Diagnostics technical study, Refugees, IDPs, and returnees Displacement in Central African African organizational and institutional Republic Republic assessment P162987 Support to an approach to Africa Ethiopia Other: Report: economic, skills Refugees developing jobs in Ethiopia including profiling and preparation of the a certain percentage for refugees. economic opportunities P162624 Somali IDA displacement response Africa Somalia Needs assessment Forced Displacement preparation P161762 Using micro-data to inform durable Africa Regional Other: Data collection and survey Refugees, IDPs, and host solutions for conflict-related Communities displacement in Sub-Saharan Africa 93 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P161011 Repatriation of Somali Refugees Africa Somali Socioeconomic assessment; poverty Refugees assessment P158825 Uganda: Joint UN-WB Refugee and Africa Uganda Other: Report Refugees and host communities Host Population Empowerment (ReHoPE) Strategic Framework P155330 Lake Chad Basin Forced Africa Regional Regional assessment Refugees and IDPs Displacement - Sub-Regional Prelimina P154755 The Macro & Micro Economics of Africa Kenya Socioeconomic analysis Refugees Refugees: A Socioeconomic Analysis (SEA) for Kakuma Refugee Camp P152459 Horn of Africa Displacement Study Africa Regional Socioeconomic assessment Refugees, IDPs, host communities, and returnees P149503 AFCRI Great Lakes Displacement Africa Regional Political-economy, social analysis Refugees, IDPs, and returnees STDY P149174 Using Mobile Phone Interviews to Africa Mali Other: report knowledge sharing Refugees, IDPs, and returnees Track Welfare of (Returning) Refugees and IDPs from the Mali Crisis P148891 Social Protection Policy Dialogue Africa South Sudan Policy: dialogue IDPs and host Communities P147813 Mali Immediate Post-conflict Africa Mali conflict analysis Refugees, IDPs, and host Recovery Support Initiative Communities P130589 South Sudan: Enhancing Africa South Sudan Social Impact Assessment Refugees, IDPs Understanding and Informing Programming through Support for 94 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type Return and Reintegration of IDPs and Refugees P130589 SS-Displacement Reintegration Africa South Sudan Other: study on return and Refugees, IDPs, and returnees South Sudan reintegration of IDPs and Refugees P126447 Analysis of displacement in Somalia Africa Somalia Social analysis Refugees, IDPs, and returnees P121069 Assessment of Development Needs Africa Sudan Needs Assessment Refugees, IDPs, and host of Refugees and IDPs in Eastern communities Sudan P114528 Somalia - Community-Driven Africa Somalia Other: report - how to guidance Local communities Recovery and Development P114223 Rural-Urban Migration & Poverty in Africa Sudan Policy: recommendations Migrants (rural) Sudan P106400 Migration, Remittances and Africa Regional Other: Foreign Trade, FDI, and Capital Migrants (economic) Development in Africa Flows Study P096798 TA/Conflict Analysis Northern Africa Uganda conflict analysis IDPs and returnees Uganda P096772 Northern Uganda: Land Policy and Africa Uganda land assessment (quantitative) IDPs, host communities, and the Return to Peace – Poverty and returnees Social Impact Assessment P087916 SD-Joint Assessment JAM (FY05) Africa Sudan Needs Assessment IDPs and host communities OTHER Mental Health Among Displaced Africa Regional Other: Discussion brief IDPs and refugees People and Refugees: Making the Case for Action at The World Bank Group 95 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER The Economics of Hosting Refugees: Africa Kenya Macroeconomic analysis Refugees and host communities A Host Community Perspective From Turkana OTHER Leaving, Staying, or Coming Back?: Africa Mali Other: report Refugees Migration Decisions during the Northern Mali Conflict OTHER A social Impact Analysis for Kakuma Africa Kenya Social impact assessment Host communities Town and Refugee Camp Turkana County, Kenya OTHER Socioeconomic Impact of the Crisis Africa Mali Poverty analysis Refugees, IDPs, and returnees in North Mali on Displaced people OTHER Study on Internally Displaced Africa South Sudan Other: Study IDPs Population, Gender and Livelihoods in Kassala State, Eastern Sudan OTHER The Effect of Refugee Inflows on Africa Tanzania Macroeconomic analysis Refugees and host communities Host communities: Evidence from Tanzania IFC Kakuma as marketplace brief (09– Africa Kenya Micro: economic impact analysis, Refugees and host communities 2017) social impact analysis P110058 ID TF-PNPM Support Facility EAP Indonesia Other: program n.a. P104081 Timor-Leste-Communication and EAP Timor-Leste Other: training program IDPs Leadership Capacity for Nation P100547 IDP reintegration through livelihoods EAP Indonesia Other: report (how-to guide) IDPs OTHER The Search for Durable Solutions: EAP Philippines Conflict analysis IDPs Armed Conflict and Forced 96 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type Displacement in Mindanao, Philippines (2011) OTHER Behind the veil of the conflict - EAP Philippines Other: Report IDPs Philippines. Moving towards economic integration for sustained development and peace in Mindanao P252351 Data Platform - Socioeconomic ECA Ukraine Peacebuilding assessment IDPs Impacts of Conflict and Displacement P163126 Policy Dialogue and Research on ECA Turkey Policy: dialogue Refugees Syrian Displacement in Turkey P163126 Policy Dialogue and Research on ECA Turkey Policy: Policy dialogue and research Refugees and host communities Syrian Displacement in Turkey P160648 Building the evidence base on the ECA Turkey Other: study Refugees and migrants (economic) migrant and refugee crisis in the European Union and Turkey P160626 Impact Evaluation of Refugees on ECA Turkey Micro: economic Impact assessment Refugees Labor Markets P160625 Policy Note Response to Refugee ECA Turkey Policy: policy note Refugees Crisis P157784 Conflict and Displacement ECA Ukraine Other: TA: capacity building and — mainstreaming conflict sensitivity mainstreaming P156464 Ukraine Shared Prosperity FY16 ECA Ukraine Macroeconomic analysis: Micro IDPs P151588 Mainstreaming Conflict Sensitivity in ECA Ukraine conflict analysis IDPs and returnees the Ukraine Program P151284 Georgia Policy Review for IDPs ECA Georgia Policy: policy review IDPs 97 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P151079 Regional Development and ECA Turkey Programmatic approach: social Refugees, IDPs, and returnees Vulnerability analysis, economic analysis P122730 Supporting the livelihoods of ECA Caucasus Other: review of current practices and IDPs internally displaced person in lessons Georgia P118363 Crisis Impact on IDPs ECA Azerbaijan Other: Study; poverty analysis IDPs P074906 conflict-induced displacement ECA Regional Other: study: review of surveys, IDPs assessments and field studies P074906 Long-Term Conflict-Induced ECA Regional Regional assessment IDPs Displacement in ECA Region Study OTHER Ukraine - Socioeconomic impacts of ECA Ukraine Socioeconomic assessment IDPs and returnees internal displacement and veteran return OTHER Turkey: Socioeconomic Assessment ECA Turkey Socioeconomic assessment Refugees and host communities of Impact of SuTP on Turkish Host Communities. OTHER Evaluation Report: Azerbaijan ECA Azerbaijan Other: analysis of summative and IDPs (youth) Internally Displaced Persons Youth impact evaluation Support Project - Youth Skills and Business Development (2013). OTHER Forced Displacement in Europe and ECA Regional Other: Report Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Central Asia and returnees OTHER Conflict displacement and labor ECA Regional Micro and macroeconomic analysis Refugees market outcomes in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina 98 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER Ukraine Recovery and Peacebuilding ECA Ukraine peacebuilding assessment Refugees Assessment Vol I KNOMAD Return Migration and Reintegration ECA Croatia and Other: seminar report Returnees into Croatia and Kosovo Kosovo P158842 Haiti and the Dominican Republic: LAC Caribbean Macroeconomic Impact assessment, Migrants (economic) Migration, Remittances and Poverty analysis Development on Quisqueya Island P083268 Analysis of Migration LAC Guatemala Micro and Macroeconomic analysis Migrants (economic) KNOMAD The impacts of IDPs on host LAC Colombia Macroeconomic analysis IDPs and host communities communities in Colombia KNOMAD Civil Conflict, Internal Migration, and LAC Colombia Other: Case Study IDPs Monetary Transfers: A Case Study in Colombia P165483 The Mashreq Displacement and MENA Regional Policy: policy notes, analytical work Refugees, IDPs, and host Solidarity Platform Communities P164679 Developing Innovative Practices for MENA Lebanon Social Impact assessment; Other: Refugees and host communities Improving Social Cohesion between strategy note, best practices on social Lebanese and Syrian Refugees living cohesion report in Host Communities P163762 Host Municipalities + Refugee MENA Regional Other: program Refugees and host communities Inclusion P162629 The Role of Financial Services to MENA Lebanon Other: analysis: evidence and lessons; Refugees Manage the Syrian Refugee Crisis in economic - demand-side analysis, Lebanon Feasibility study 99 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P161366 Land Tenure Survey of Displaced MENA Syrian Arab Other: survey IDPs Syrians Republic P160776 CMI Refugee-Hosting Communities MENA Regional Other: program Refugees and host communities and Diaspora mobilization program P160609 Entrepreneurship pilot to promote MENA Jordan Other: Report Refugees economic opportunities for Jordanians and Syrians P160163 Strengthening municipal financial MENA Jordan Needs Assessment Refugees management systems to sustain service delivery in municipalities affected by the refugee crisis P159972 Programmatic Technical Assistance MENA Iraq Macroeconomic analysis IDPs and host communities for KRG's Structural Economy P159868 Refugee Cities: Learning How to MENA Regional Other: knowledge best practices Refugees and IDPs Respond to Urban Displacement in Host Countries and Communities P159595 Addressing Health Needs of Syrian MENA Syrian Arab Needs Assessment Refugees Refugees Republic P159375 Creating Jobs for Syrian Refugees by MENA Jordan Other: Sector or thematic study/note Refugees Manufacturing Future Reconstruction Supplies P159126 Impact of Syrian Refugee Crisis MENA Syrian Arab Social assessment Refugees Republic P158749 Syrian Refugees MENA Jordan Other: Report Refugees 100 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P158253 Strengthening Migration Systems MENA Regional Other: report Refugees and host communities and Outcomes P155418 Social Context Analysis of Forced MENA Regional Social analysis IDPs and host communities Displacement Across Syria's Borders P154864 Iraq Crisis Response MENA Iraq Other: report n.a. P153563 Syrian refugee crisis impact MENA Syrian Arab Micro: Economic and Social Impact Refugees Republic Assessment P152703 Economic and Social Impact MENA Iraq Micro and Macroeconomic and social IDPs and host communities Assessment for KRG impact analysis P152145 Welfare and Needs of Syrian MENA Regional Micro economic analysis, poverty Refugees, IDPs, and host Refugees analysis communities P144499 Enhancing the rights of migrants and MENA Regional Other: report - lessons Refugees, IDPs, and host of those left behind communities P114390 MNA Migration Policy Notes MENA Regional Policy: note Migrants (economic) P108075 Impact of Displaced Iraqis on Region MENA Iraq Macro: Economic analysis; economic Forcibly displaced updates and modeling OTHER Impact of the Libya Crisis on the MENA Tunisia Macroeconomic and social impact Refugees Tunisian Economy assessment OTHER The Toll of War: The Economic and MENA Syrian Arab Socioeconomic assessment Refugees, IDPs, and host Social Consequences of the Conflict Republic communities in Syria OTHER MENA Economic Monitor MENA Regional Micro and Macroeconomic analysis Refugees OTHER MENA’s Forced Displacement Crisis MENA Regional Other: report Refugees and IDPs 101 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER Levant: Economic Effects of the MENA Syrian Arab Macroeconomic analysis Refugees Syrian War and the Spread of IS on Republic the Levant OTHER Cities of Refuge in the Middle East: MENA Regional Policy note Refugees Bringing an Urban Lens to the Forced Displacement Challenge OTHER Lebanon - Economic and Social MENA Lebanon Macroeconomic and Social Impact Refugees Impact Assessment of the Syrian Assessment Conflict P163931 Age, Gender and Forced Other World Other: Report: extent of available data Refugees and IDPs Displacement: Building evidence and information base for interventions that response to age and gender-specific vulnerability P163402 Forced Displacement: Policy Focused Other World Other: literature review; study on social Refugees and IDPs Analytics for Operational Support cohesion; economics, study on economics of return (micro) P163359 SPF: Strategic Platform for IDA18 Other World Other: strategy notes, policy notes, Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Refugee Sub-Window workshops; Social assessment: welfare and returnees assessment P159885 Refugee Survey (Enlargement of Other World Other: survey Refugees Sample) P159876 OGE-Climate Change, Migration and Other World Socioeconomic assessment Migrants (climate change) Securing Resilience 102 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P158054 Forced Displacement as a Other World Micro and Macroeconomic and social Refugees, IDPs, and host Development Issue: 60–20: 60 million analysis communities people, 20 years in displacement P149194 Housing Displaced People: A Simple, Other World Other: rapid performance assessments IDPs Innovative Solution P148257 Displacement Development Other World Other: report recommendations Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Interventions and returnees P126444 Operationalizing Human Rights Other World Other: study: strengthen strategic, Refugees and IDPs Instruments in the World Bank's operational and analytical objectives Work Targeting Internally Displaced Peoples (IDPs) and Refugees in the Africa P126444 Internal displacement and the Other World Other: working paper IDPs Kampala Convention: an opportunity for development actors P126443 Assessing the impact and costs of Other World Socioeconomic analysis, Poverty study Refugees, IDPs, host communities, forced displacement and returnees P126441 Assessment of lessons learned on Other World Social analysis and political-economy Refugees and IDPs livelihood rehabilitation for refugees analysis and internally displaced people P123217 study on impact and cost of forced Other World Other: study Refugees, IDPs, host communities, displacement and returnees P117326 The Impacts of Refugees on Other World Socioeconomic impact assessment Refugees Neighboring Countries: A Development Challenge 103 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type P117057 Scoping exercise for a World Bank Other World Other: scoping study Refugees, IDPs, and returnees work program - Forced Displacement: an Overview of the WB Program P117018 Forced displacement of and potential Other World Other: working paper Refugees, IDPs, and host solutions for Internally Displaced communities Persons (IDPs) and refugees in the Sahel - Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger (2013 P111095 World Development Report 2010 Other World Other: WDR report Refugees and host communities P107221 CA: Knowledge Generation & Other World Other: report Refugees, IDPs, and asylum seekers Sharing P101155 Multi-Donor Trust Fund Review Other World Other: review Refugees and IDPs OTHER sourcebook on practical responses to Other World Other: sourcebook Refugees, IDPs, host communities, forced displacement and returnees OTHER The Forced Displacement Crisis: A Other World Other: study Refugees, IDPs, and returnees Joint Paper by Multilateral Development Banks OTHER Stocktaking of Global Forced Other World Other: report Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Displacement Data returnees, and asylum seekers OTHER The Role of Financial Services in Other World Other: report Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Humanitarian Crises and asylum seekers OTHER Identification in the Context of Other World Other: Report Refugees and migrants Forced Displacement: Identification for Development 104 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER How Many Years Have Refugees Other World Policy: (research) Migrants Been in Exile? OTHER Forced Displacement and Refugees Other World Other: working paper: economic Refugees and IDPs in Sub-Saharan Africa An Economic inquiry Inquiry OTHER Vulnerability of Internally Displaced Other World vulnerability analysis IDPs Persons in Urban Settings OTHER Sustainable Refugee Return (2015) Other World Social analysis Refugees and returnees Niels Harild, Asger Christensen and Roger Zetter. OTHER GPFD Annual Progress Report Other World Other: annual progress report IDPs and host communities (January 2014 - June 2015). OTHER Immigrant versus Natives? Other World Macro: economic analysis Host communities and migrants Displacement and Job Creation OTHER GPFD Annual Progress Report July Other World Other: annual progress report Refugees, IDPs, host communities, 2012-December 2013 (2014). and returnees OTHER Political economy and forced Other World Political economy analysis IDPs and local institutions displacement: guidance and lessons from nine country case studies (2014) OTHER Forced Displacement: Moving from Other World Other: report background note Refugees and IDPs Managing Risk to Facilitating Opportunity 105 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER GPFD Annual Progress Report 2011– Other World Other: annual progress report Refugees, IDPs, and host 2012 & Strategy for 2013 and communities Beyond (2013). OTHER Migration & Poverty Other World Policy: brief Migrants OTHER The Development Challenge of Other World Policy: note IDPs and Refugees Finding Durable Solutions for Refugees and Internally Displaced People (2011) Niels Harild, Asger Christensen. OTHER Forced Displacement: The Other World Policy: note IDPs and host Communities Development Challenge OTHER South- South Migration Remittances Other World Other: Report Migrants OTHER Living in Limbo conflict-induced Other World Other: Report Refugees, IDPs, host communities, displacement in Europe and Central and returnees Asia KNOMAD Migration and Development Brief Other World Policy: brief Migrants (economic) 2017 KNOMAD Policy Brief on Remittances and Other World Policy: brief Refugees and IDPs Forced Displacement KNOMAD Policy Brief Integration in Host Other World Policy: brief Refugees, IDPs, and host Societies and Development communities KNOMAD Collecting data on remittances to Other World Policy: brief Refugees and IDPs and from refugees and internally displaced persons 106 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type KNOMAD The Gender-Based Effects of Other World Other: Working paper Refugees Displacement: the case of Congolese Refugees in Rwanda KNOMAD integration in host societies and Other World Policy: brief Refugees, IDPs, and host development: Adapting policy Communities approaches to the new mobility KNOMAD Migration and Development Report Other World Other: Report Migrants (economic) 2016 KNOMAD Refugees’ Right to Work and Access Other World Socioeconomic assessment Refugees to Labor Markets – An Assessment part I KNOMAD Refugees’ Right to Work and Access Other World Other: country case studies Refugees to Labor Markets – An Assessment part II KNOMAD Strengthening the Migration- Other World Policy Refugees Development Nexus through Improved Policy and Institutional Coherence KNOMAD Host Society integration Other World Policy: brief Host communities KNOMAD Host Society Integration as a Other World Literature review Host communities Development Vector: A Literature Review KNOMAD Remittances Sent to and from Other World Literature review Refugees and IDPs Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons 107 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type KNOMAD migration and remittances factbook Other World Other: report Migrants 2016 KNOMAD Internal migration in developing Other World Other: report IDPs countries an overview P162258 support Afghanistan's displaced SA Afghanistan Social analysis and internal review IDPs, host communities, and population returnees P159551 Poverty and Migration SA Afghanistan Poverty study, poverty analysis IDPs, host communities, and returnees P158572 AFG: Forced Displacement and IDP SA Afghanistan Other: Institutional and governance Refugees, IDPs, and host review; Socioeconomic assessment Communities P158572 Afghanistan: Forced Displacement SA Afghanistan Other: Institutional and Governance Refugees, IDPs, and returnees and IDP Review P158055 AF-International Labor Migration TA SA Afghanistan Socioeconomic assessment Migrants (migrants) P157280 AF: Poverty, Shared Prosperity and SA Afghanistan Socioeconomic profiling Refugees Equity (under which there is a joint analysis agreement with UNHCR and a draft socioeconomic profile of Afghan Refugees) P122386 Research on migration, IDPs and SA Afghanistan Other: Report Refugees, IDPs, and Returnees returned refugees in Afghanistan OTHER Afghanistan's Forced Displacement SA Afghanistan legal and policy framework assessment Refugees, IDPs, host communities, Legal and Policy Framework and returnees Assessment 108 Appendix C World Bank Group Advisory Services and Analytics Project ID Name Region Country Type of Analysis Population Type OTHER Research Study on IDPs in Urban SA Afghanistan socioeconomic assessment IDPs Settings – Afghanistan (in Dari) (2011). Note: EAP = East Asia and Pacific [Region]; ECA = Europe and Central Asia [Region]; IDP = internally displaced person; KNOMAD = Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean; MENA = Middle East and North Africa [Region]; SAR = South Asia Region; UNHCR = United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 109 Appendix D. World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P035637 Sierra Leone Economic Rehabilitation and 2000 Indirect No No No No No Recovery P040649 Sierra Leone Community Reintegration and 2000 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Rehabilitation P050578 Colombia Rural Education 2000 Indirect No No No No No P056393 Angola Second Social Action Fund 2000 Indirect No No No No No P057951 Bosnia and Mostar Water Supply & Sanitation 2000 Direct Yes No Yes No No Herzegovina Project P057952 Armenia Social Investment Fund 2 Project 2000 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes (SIF 2) P058070 Sri Lanka North-East Irrigated Agriculture 2000 Indirect No No No No No Project P064510 Burundi Second Social Action Project 2000 Direct Yes Yes Yes Yes No P064556 Burundi Emergency Economic Recovery 2000 Direct No Yes Yes No No Credit Project P065725 Guinea-Bissau Economic Rehabilitation and 2000 Indirect No No No No No Recovery P069325 Kosovo Emergency Farm Reconstruction 2000 Indirect No No No No No P069762 Timor-Leste Community and Local Governance 2000 Direct No Yes Yes No No P070294 Timor-Leste Health Sector Rehabilitation and 2000 Indirect No No No No No Development Project 110 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P070533 Timor-Leste Agricultural Rehabilitation 2000 Indirect No No No No No P044674 Eritrea Emergency Reconstruction 2001 Direct No Yes Yes No No P058521 Bosnia and Electric Power Reconstruction 3 2001 Direct No No Yes No No Herzegovina Project P064961 Burundi Public Works and Employment 2001 Direct No Yes Yes No No Creation Project P066169 Bosnia and Local Initiatives (Microfinance) 2 2001 Direct No Yes Yes No No Herzegovina P067084 Ethiopia Emergency Recovery and Rehab. 2001 Direct No Yes Yes No No Project P069293 Azerbaijan Health Reform LIL 2001 Indirect No No No No No P069886 Ethiopia Multisectoral HIV/AIDS Project 2001 Direct Yes Yes No No No P070995 Bosnia and Community Development 2001 Direct No No Yes Yes Yes Herzegovina P072356 Timor-Leste Community Empowerment 2 2001 Indirect No No No No No P073278 Rwanda Supplemental Cr. to Health & 2001 Direct No No No Yes No Population P073330 Rwanda Economic Recovery Credit 2001 Indirect No No No No No Supplement P073483 Macedonia, former Children & Youth Development 2001 Indirect No No No No No Yugoslav Republic of Project (LIL) P041642 Colombia Productive Partnerships Support 2002 Direct No Yes No No No Project 111 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P055131 Azerbaijan Structural Adjustment Credit 2 2002 Direct Yes Yes No No No P057692 Colombia Second Magdaleno Medio Regional 2002 Indirect No No No No No Development P071375 Côte d'Ivoire Economic Recovery Credit 2002 Indirect No No No No No P072647 Timor-Leste Fundamental School Quality Project 2002 Indirect No No No No No P073604 Eritrea Emergency Demobilization and 2002 Direct No Yes Yes No No Reintegration P073883 Sierra Leone HIV/AIDS Response Project 2002 Direct Yes Yes Yes No No P074642 Sierra Leone Economic Rehabilitation and 2002 Indirect No No No No No Recovery II P075342 Timor-Leste Third Community Empowerment 2002 Indirect No No No No No and Local Governance Project P002952 Uganda Northern Uganda Social Action 2003 Direct No Yes Yes No No Fund P003248 Zambia Zambia National Response to 2003 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes HIV/AIDS (ZANARA) P040555 Georgia Health Sector Development Project 2003 Indirect No No No No No P069861 Colombia Social Sector Adjustment Loan 2003 Direct No Yes No No No Project P073488 Philippines ARMM Social Fund Project 2003 Direct No Yes No No No P074128 Sierra Leone Health Sector Reconstruction and 2003 Indirect No No No No No Development Project P074320 Sierra Leone Rehabilitation of Basic Education 2003 Direct No Yes Yes No No 112 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P074602 Burundi Economic Rehabilitation Credit 2003 Indirect No No No No No P078212 West Bank and Gaza Emergency Municipal Services 2003 Indirect No No No No No Rehabilitation P078623 Sierra Leone Economic Rehabilitation and 2003 Indirect No No No No No Recovery III P079156 Indonesia Third Kecamatan Development 2003 Indirect No No No No No P079335 Sierra Leone National Social Action 2003 Direct No Yes Yes No No P082472 Afghanistan National Emergency Employment 2003 Direct No No No Yes No Program for Rural Access P051306 Colombia Peace and Development Project 2004 Direct No Yes Yes No No P071207 Cambodia Provincial and Rural Infrastructure 2004 Indirect No No No No No P077513 Congo, Republic of HIV/AIDS and Health 2004 Direct No Yes No No No P078311 Serbia (Serbia and Real Estate Cadastre & Registration 2004 Direct Yes Yes No No No Montenegro) Project P078627 Burundi Economic Management Support 2004 Indirect No No No No No P078658 Congo, Democratic Emergency Demobilization and 2004 Indirect No No No No No Republic of Reintegration Project P079259 Kosovo Community Development Fund 2 2004 Direct No No Yes No No Project P081558 Angola Third Social Action Fund 2004 Indirect No No No No No P082223 Montenegro Healthcare System Improvement 2004 Direct Yes Yes No No No P082516 Congo, Democratic Multisectoral HIV/AIDS Project 2004 Indirect No No No No No Republic of 113 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P086747 Sri Lanka Community Livelihoods in Conflict- 2004 Direct No Yes No No No Affected Areas Project - AF III P057929 Eritrea Power Distribution and Rural 2005 Indirect No No No No No Electrification Project P064558 Burundi Agriculture Rehabilitation & 2005 Direct No Yes Yes No No Sustainable Land Management P065126 Guinea Health Sector 2005 Direct No No No Yes No P065127 Guinea Second National Rural 2005 Indirect No No No No No Infrastructure Project P069207 Senegal Casamance Emergency 2005 Indirect No No No No No Reconstruction P076730 Croatia Social & Economic Recovery Project 2005 Direct No Yes No No No P078070 Indonesia Support for Poor and 2005 Indirect No No No No No Disadvantaged Areas P080413 Africa Great Lakes Initiative on HIV/AIDS 2005 Direct Yes Yes Yes No No (GLIA) Support P083353 Bosnia and Urban Infrastructure and Service 2005 Indirect No No No No No Herzegovina Delivery P083932 Sri Lanka North East Housing Reconstruction 2005 Direct No Yes Yes No No Program P087907 Iraq Emergency School Construction 2005 Indirect No No No No No and Rehabilitation P088619 Congo, Democratic Emergency Living Conditions 2005 Indirect No No No No No Republic of Support 114 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P089751 Azerbaijan IDP Economic Development 2005 Direct No Yes No No No Support Project P090194 Rwanda Urgent Electricity Rehabilitation 2005 Indirect No No No No No P098266 Liberia Community Empowerment 2005 Direct Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes P078389 Sierra Leone SL Infrastructure Development 2006 Indirect No No No No No Project (Transport) P088751 Congo, Democratic Health Sector Rehabilitation 2006 Indirect No No No No No Republic of P094476 Sudan Community Development Fund 2006 Indirect No No No No No P096200 Bosnia and Land Registration 2006 Indirect No No No No No Herzegovina P099201 Azerbaijan Judicial Modernization 2006 Direct No Yes No No No P099226 South Sudan Juba Rapid Impact Emergency 2006 Direct No No Yes No No Project P083110 Georgia First East-West Highway 2007 Indirect No No No No No Improvement P095211 Burundi Community and Social 2007 Direct No Yes Yes No No Development Project P095229 Angola Emergency Multisector Recovery 2007 Indirect No No No No No Program 2 P097605 Indonesia SPADA in Aceh and Nias 2007 Indirect No No No No No P100390 Sri Lanka Puttalam Housing Project 2007 Direct No Yes Yes No No 115 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P100726 Iraq Emergency School Construction 2007 Indirect No No No No No and Rehabilitation AF P103875 Lebanon Municipal Infrastructure 2007 Indirect No No No No No P104507 Colombia Additional Financing for Colombia 2007 Indirect No No No No No Social Safety Net Project (Ln. 7337) P104523 Africa Regional HIV/AIDS Partnership 2007 Direct Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Program P104595 Central African Emergency Urban Infrastructure 2007 Indirect No No No No No Republic Rehabilitation and Maintenance P071631 Côte d'Ivoire Emergency Multi-Sector HIV/AIDS 2008 Direct Yes Yes No No No Project P082817 Côte d'Ivoire Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance 2008 Direct No Yes Yes No No Project P094650 Iraq Emergency Water Supply 2008 Indirect No No No No No P096823 Serbia Delivery of Improved Local Services 2008 Direct Yes Yes No No No Project P104257 West Bank and Gaza Village and Neighborhood 2008 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Development P105116 Azerbaijan Social Protection Development 2008 Indirect No No No No No P107698 Iraq Strengthening Emergency Health 2008 Indirect No No No No No Response in Northern Iraq P109964 Burundi Second Multisectoral HIV/AIDS 2008 Indirect No No No No No P110762 Nepal Peace Support 2008 Direct No No Yes No No 116 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P090644 Nigeria Community and Social 2009 Indirect No No No No No Development Project P093699 Angola Market-Oriented Smallholder 2009 Direct No No Yes No No Agriculture P106220 Timor-Leste Youth Development 2009 Indirect No No No No No P110126 Georgia Regional and Municipal 2009 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Infrastructure P113438 Burundi Food Crisis Response Development 2009 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Policy Grant P113586 South Sudan Southern Sudan Emergency Food 2009 Indirect No No No No No Crisis Response Project P116923 Sudan Abyei Start-Up 2009 Direct No Yes Yes No No P113036 Sri Lanka North East Local Services 2010 Indirect No No No No No Improvement Project P117103 Afghanistan National Solidarity Program III 2010 Indirect No No No No No P118870 Sri Lanka Sri Lanka: Emergency Northern 2010 Direct No No Yes No No Recovery Project P117444 West Bank and Gaza Palestinian NGOs IV 2011 Indirect No No No No No P122099 Central African Community Reintegration Project 2011 Indirect No No No No No Republic P126734 Lebanon National Volunteer Service Program 2011 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes (as of restructuring in 2016) 117 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P122800 Cote d'Ivoire Post-Conflict Reconstruction and 2012 Indirect No No No No No Recovery P122943 Azerbaijan IDP Living Standards and 2012 Direct No Yes No No No Livelihoods Project P125414 Pakistan FATA Urban Centers 2012 Indirect No No No No No P125425 Kyrgyz Republic Economic Recovery Support 2012 Indirect No No No No No P126426 Pakistan Revitalizing Health Services in 2012 Indirect No No No No No Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Project P126689 Jordan Delivering Legal Aid Services to 2012 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Iraqi and Palestinian Refugees P127949 Africa Horn of Africa Emergency Health 2012 Direct Yes No No No No and Nutrition P130174 Niger Phase 2 Niger Basin Water 2012 Indirect No No No No No Resources Development and Sustainable Ecosystems Management Program P122944 Azerbaijan Second Rural Investment Project 2013 Indirect No No No No No P123503 Mali Emergency Education For All 2013 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes P124761 Lebanon Social Promotion and Protection 2013 Indirect No No No No No P127079 South Sudan Local Governance and Service 2013 Direct No Yes Yes No No Delivery Project P127328 Mali Emergency Safety Nets project 2013 Direct No Yes No No No (Jigiséméjiri) 118 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P133811 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Crisis Recovery 2013 Indirect No No No No No P143915 South Sudan Safety Net and Skills Development 2013 Direct No Yes Yes No No P144442 Mali Reconstruction and Economic 2014 Direct No No Yes Yes Yes Recovery P145196 Congo, Democratic Eastern Recovery Project 2014 Direct No Yes Yes No No Republic of P145865 Jordan Emergency Project to Assist Jordan 2014 Direct No No No Yes No to Partially Mitigate the Impact of Syrian Conflict P147689 Jordan Emergency Services and Social 2014 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Resilience P149242 Lebanon Emergency National Poverty 2014 Direct No No No Yes No Targeting Program P149512 Central African Emergency Food Crisis Response 2014 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Republic and Agricultural Relaunch P149700 South Sudan Emergency Food Crisis Response AF 2014 Indirect No No No No No P149724 Lebanon Municipal Services Emergency 2014 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Project P149884 Central African Emergency Public Services 2014 Indirect No No No No No Republic Response Project P151215 Chad Emergency Food and Livestock 2015 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Crisis Response P152527 West Bank and Gaza Emergency Budget Support 2015 Indirect No No No No No 119 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P152646 Lebanon Emergency Primary Healthcare 2015 Direct No No No Yes No Restoration Project P152898 Lebanon Emergency Education System 2015 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Stabilization P153030 Central African Health System Support AF 2015 Direct No Yes No No No Republic P151432 Ethiopia Enhancing Shared Prosperity 2016 Indirect No No No No No through Equitable Services P152512 Central African LONDO Stand-Up project 2016 Indirect No No No No No Republic P152821 Zambia Displaced Persons and Border 2016 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Communities Project P152822 Africa Development Response to 2016 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) in the Horn of Africa P154278 Pakistan FATA Temporarily Displaced 2016 Direct No Yes Yes No No Persons Emergency Recovery Project P155732 Iraq Emergency Operation for 2016 Indirect No No No No No Development P156917 South Sudan Health Rapid Results AF 2016 Direct No Yes No No No P157303 Congo, Democratic Eastern Recovery AF 2016 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Republic of 120 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P157861 Jordan Piloting Delivery of Justice Sector 2016 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Services to Poor Jordanians and Refugees in Host Communities P157890 Nigeria State Education Improvement AF 2016 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes P157898 Nigeria Community and Social 2016 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Development AF P157899 Nigeria Youth Employment and Social 2016 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Support AF P157977 Nigeria State Health Investment AF 2016 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes P158980 Lebanon Emergency National Poverty 2016 Direct No No No Yes No Targeting Program - AF P156634 Kenya Water and Sanitation Development 2017 Direct No No No Yes No P157891 Nigeria Multisectoral Crisis Recovery for 2017 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Northeastern Nigeria P158066 Sudan Sustainable Livelihoods for 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Displaced and Vulnerable Communities in Eastern Sudan: Phase 2 P159053 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Crisis Response Project 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes P159470 Lebanon Reaching All Children with 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Education in Lebanon Support Project P159522 Jordan Economic Opportunities for 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Jordanians and Syrian Refugees P4R 121 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P160223 Lebanon Roads and Employment Project 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes P160236 Jordan Second Programmatic Energy and 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Water Sector Reforms P160567 Afghanistan Citizens' Charter Afghanistan 2017 Indirect No No No No No Project P161067 Kenya Development Response to 2017 Direct No No No Yes No Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) in the Horn of Africa P161591 Central African Service Delivery and Support to 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Republic Communities Affected by Displacement Project P161654 Iraq Promoting the Inclusion of Conflict- 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Affected Iraqi Youth P161806 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Crisis Response Project 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Additional Financing P162004 Turkey Education Infrastructure for 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Resilience P162022 Afghanistan Herat Electrification Project 2017 Direct No Yes Yes No No P163241 Jordan Integrated Social Services for 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Vulnerable Youth P163387 Jordan Jordan Emergency Health Project 2017 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes P163468 Afghanistan Citizens' Charter Afghanistan 2017 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Project - Emergency Regional 122 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support Displacement Response Additional Financing P163476 Lebanon Health Resilience 2017 Direct No No No Yes No P163729 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Crisis Response Project 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes - Second Additional Financing P163741 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Health and Nutrition 2017 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Project Additional Financing P160224 Lebanon Greater Beirut Public Transport 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Project P160926 Cameroon Education Reform Support Project 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes P161670 Turkey Employment Support for Syrians 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Under Temporary Protection and Turkish Citizens P161982 Jordan Municipal Services and Social 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Resilience AF P162407 Jordan Education Reform Support 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Program‐for‐Results P163108 Iraq Social Fund for Development 2018 Indirect No No No No No P163515 Uganda Support to Municipal Infrastructure 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Development Program (Additional Financing P117876) P163576 Lebanon Creating Economic Opportunities in 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program 123 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P163777 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Electricity Access Project 2018 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes P163782 Uganda Integrated Water Management and 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Development Project P163829 Ethiopia Ethiopia Economic Opportunities 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Program P164190 Yemen, Republic of Integrated Urban Services 2018 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Emergency Project P164466 Yemen, Republic of Emergency Health and Nutrition 2018 Direct No Yes No Yes Yes Project Second Additional Financing P164803 Cameroon Community Development Program 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Support Project Response to Forced Displacement Additional Financing P164830 Cameroon Social Safety Nets for Crisis 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Response (Additional Financing P128534) P164954 Cameroon Health System Performance 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Reinforcement Project (Additional Financing P156679) P165114 Iraq Emergency Social Stabilization and 2018 Direct No Yes Yes Yes Yes Resilience Project P166360 Jordan First Equitable Growth & Job 2018 Direct Yes No No Yes Yes Creation Programmatic Development Policy Financing 124 Appendix D World Bank Lending Portfolio Project Approval Refuge Returne Host Balanced ID Country Project Name Fiscal Year Type e IDP e Community Support P167672 Bangladesh Health Sector Support Project 2018 Direct Yes No No No No Additional Financing Source: Independent Evaluation Group Note: AF = additional financing; IDP = internally displaced person; P4F = Program-for-Results. 125 Appendix E. Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.1. Azerbaijan Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of forced • The conflict over disputed Nagorno Karabakh (1988–1994) displaced about 595,000 people, or displacement in the country 7 percent of the Azerbaijani population. Over time and with new births, this population has grown to 612,800. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, established by the Norwegian Refugee Council, puts the number of Azerbaijani internally displaced persons (IDPs) at 565,000 for 2015; the national State Committee for IDPs and refugees estimates this figure at 798,000. • The conflict has been frozen for the past 25 years with little progress toward a political solution, and IDPs remain in the situation of protracted forced displacement with profound implications for their socioeconomic status. • With the rise of oil and gas exports, the Azerbaijani economy has experienced significant growth in the past 15 years, averaging about 13 percent per year. Although poverty incidence among the general population has declined from 49 percent in 2001 to about 5 percent in 2013, the poverty incidence among IDPs remains high at about 18 percent (12 percent, according to the State Committee for IDPs and refugees). Poverty among IDPs is also believed to be deeper and more severe than poverty among non-IDPs (World Bank 2015a). • For years, the official rhetoric emphasized the return of IDPs to their homes as the only acceptable solution; as the conflict dragged on, the government’s approach evolved to better address the needs of the displaced because high levels of psychosocial distress and exclusion began to manifest itself. • With the influx of oil money, government put in place a housing program for IDPs living in the worst conditions. With the financing provided by the State Oil Fund—a cumulative of manat 2.1 billion ($1.2 billion) at the end of 2017—the Social Development Fund for IDPs constructed 86 new districts complete with the social infrastructure, where about 210,000 IDPs were relocated. 126 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • Over time, support to the IDPs has evolved to include livelihood support. IDPs have lower employment rates and higher work inactivity rates that non-IDPs; they possess few self-reliant income-generating strategies and are highly dependent on state transfers as their main source of income (about 70 percent of IDP households have government assistance as their main source of income). • Previous administrative structures and social services have been retained and transplanted to locations where IDPs now live, which is seen by some as an unwillingness on the part of the government to completely integrate IDPs. What has the World Bank Group’s • The government and the World Bank have a long history of cooperation in addressing IDPs’ understanding of the needs or constraints of needs, and the World Bank’s understanding evolved over time, reflecting the evolution of forcibly displaced populations and host government’s thinking. communities been? • Although the World Bank’s first project, Azerbaijan Pilot Reconstruction Project (APRP) 1998– 2005, provided relocation support, facilitated income generation for 33,000 IDPs, and reconstructed major infrastructure in areas that had recently become accessible, its second project, IDP Economic Development Support Project (2005–11) aimed to improve the living conditions of IDPs, wherever they were located in the country, through demand-driven, community-based microprojects. • Building Assets and Promoting Self-Reliance: The Livelihoods of IDPs report was published in October 2011, aiming to review the outstanding needs and insecurities of IDPs. It stressed that more IDPs required employment because there were extremely high levels of economic inactivity among IDPs, especially women. Also, IDPs required higher incomes because their expenditure often exceeded their income. Although they managed the gap through a series of credit and debt relations, it often became stressful and increased their dependence and economic insecurity. • This analysis informed the World Bank’s third IDP project, the Living Standards and Livelihoods Project, focused on improving living conditions and increasing economic self-reliance among IDPs. Apart from renovating social infrastructure, the project included youth training in business development, livelihood support, and income-generating activities. The livelihood support is 127 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings particularly important in the 2016–20 period, almost doubling its budget in the additional financing. What financing has the World Bank Group • The World Bank has provided $173.2 million during 1998–2020 for three projects addressing provided? Describe any programming shifts IDPs and host communities’ needs. that are evident. • These projects have seen a gradual programming shift, from reconstruction and return home to improving living conditions, essentially upgrading housing and amenities to building skills and creating earnings opportunities. At the same time, community involvement in improving living conditions—essentially participating in the microproject cycle—has evolved, increasingly engaging the community in the project cycle. With this financing, what has been done? • APRP ($20 million loan, $10 million additional financing) financed the rehabilitation of about 530 artesian wells, as well as pumps, irrigation canals, and reservoirs in project areas. Forty health care facilities in six districts, including hospitals with a total capacity of more than 500 beds, were rehabilitated, structurally repaired, and reequipped. Thirty-nine educational facilities were structurally repaired and rehabilitated, and school furniture and equipment was provided to 60 schools. In 11 districts, 4,714 houses were reconstructed or repaired to allow the return of 33,100 people. Power transmission lines, transformer stations, and other equipment were rehabilitated, and electricity coverage increased from 18 percent to 100 percent. The project also financed the purchase and distribution to returning IDPs of about 2,567 pregnant cows for milk production. At the time of evaluation, APRP project areas were self-sufficient with regard to milk, grains, and other agricultural produce. The project supported establishment of the Azerbaijan State Demining Agency (ANAMA) by assisting with the construction of a permanent base for the agency and procuring the original vehicles. • IDP Economic Development Support Project ($11.5 million loan, $15 million additional financing) financed 411 microprojects; completed microprojects included essential economic and social infrastructure such as rehabilitated or upgraded housing and internal (community) roads, community centers, schools, better sanitation, access to clean water, and electricity. The project benefited 245,000 people, and about 24 percent of them were non-IDPs. Although earnings 128 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings were not a direct objective, short-term work on microprojects created temporary jobs for about 2,100 persons, of which an estimated 65 percent were IDPs. • Living Standards and Livelihoods Project ($50 million loan, $66.7 million additional financing) is ongoing; 199,601 people have benefited from the project (50 percent are women). Under the project, 196 communities have implemented microprojects through community-driven processes; 1,300 youth have graduated from or participated in training programs; all income- generating groups (200 communities comprising 2,239 people) have been formed and have received grants; and microloans are fully disbursed (1,608 direct beneficiaries). The latest Implementation Status Report for the project suggests the quality and sustainability of IDPs’ livelihoods have increased by 43 percent, which provides some indication of reduced vulnerabilities and enhanced self-reliance. How has the World Bank Group promoted • The World Bank Group has not promoted any regional-level solutions. regional-level solutions? How has the World Bank Group promoted • The World Bank did a commendable gender analysis in looking at IDPs’ needs and gender sensitivity? vulnerabilities. The 2011 report Azerbaijan: Building Assets and Promoting Self-Reliance notes that the role of women in the household had gone through a noticeable shift. Women were previously active in the public sphere, in part at least reflecting the higher profile of women in the workplace in the former Soviet Union, but they now were more likely to be confined to the home. • The situation of female-headed households was particularly precarious, with poverty rates of 32.3 percent among IDP female-headed households compared with 22.7 percent among households headed by men. According to the United Nations Development Fund for Women, displaced women in Azerbaijan were less likely to be involved in either formal or informal work than were non-IDP women (UNIFEM 2006). When they did work, they were more likely to be in low-paying jobs. • The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, drawing on findings of UNIFEM and the United Nations Population Fund, notes that IDP women and girls experience higher rates of abuse at 129 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings the hands of their parents and partners than their counterparts in the general population do (IDMC 2014). Strained family finances, crowded living conditions, and lack of prospects for the future are reported to trigger violence, as well as underage and unregistered marriages. • The World Bank’s gender approach, as reflected in the first two of the three IDP projects (APRP and IDP-EDS) was limited to 50 percent participation (or presence) by women in the selection of community projects and development plans. This was strengthened under the third (Living Standards and Livelihoods) project. • The Livelihoods Project recognizes that the lives of youth and women have been particularly affected by displacement. The third component of the project—enhancing IDP abilities to achieve self-reliant livelihoods—targets beneficiary communities on the basis of high incidence of poverty and lack of self-reliant income generation. Within these communities, there would be a focus on IDP women. • Under its income-generating activity subcomponent, the project aims to reach about 1,500 beneficiaries, 70 percent of which would be women. Women would also constitute at least 30 percent of about 1,500 microcredit loans extended to IDPs to enable them to start up or expand new businesses. Has the World Bank Group addressed the • Although APRP predominantly addressed the needs of returnees, IDP-EDS and increasingly the needs of refugees, IDPs, and host Livelihoods Project recognized the need to include host communities. Infrastructure and service communities in a balanced fashion? projects beyond housing and segregated schools were likely to benefit the whole community, not just IDPs, and infrastructures such as electricity, sanitation works, or clean water projects, once completed, would become part of the local area infrastructure. • As long as a minimum of 30 percent of beneficiaries in a given community were IDPs, the community qualified to apply for microprojects to be implemented by the Social Development Fund for IDPs, financed by the World Bank. • With the housing program for IDPs living in the worst conditions in place, some communities completely emptied of IDPs, and the social and economic infrastructure continued to benefit the host community. During its evaluation mission, the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) team 130 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings visited at least one community in which IDPs had been moved to newly constructed apartment blocks, and the host community benefited from the safe drinking water. • Both IDPs and host communities agreed that this was the best way to proceed because their livelihoods were completely integrated. Describe the World Bank Group’s Advisory • In 2002, the World Bank undertook the Azerbaijan Household Budget Survey on IDPs, Refugees, Services and Analytic work. and the Resident Population that drew attention to the particular vulnerability of the IDP population and encouraged the government to take a more supportive attitude toward IDPs’ well-being. It gave impetus to the government’s resettlement program, and it underpinned the design of the second World Bank project with its focus on microprojects. • Building Assets and Promoting Self-Reliance: The Livelihoods of Internally Displaced Persons (2011) drew further attention to living conditions and the livelihood situation of the IDPs, notably that more than 50 percent of IDPs were living in collective centers (public buildings and dormitories), public services were absent or of low quality, and there were low employment rates and high work inactivity, and high dependence on state transfers. This ASA strongly influenced the design of the third project, with its combined focus on income-generating activities and enhancing livelihood opportunities. What has the role of other key actors been? • The key actors on the government side are the State Committee for Refugees and IDPs, the State Oil Fund of Azerbaijan, and the Social Fund for the Development for IDPs (SFDI). Apart from being the World Bank’s implementing agency for IDP projects, SFDI is also the executing agency for the construction of new IDP settlements. The State Oil Fund is the main funding body for the construction of new IDP settlements, and the State Committee for Refugees and IDPs is the main policy-making body on refugee and IDP matters. • The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the European Union (EU) participated in the development of the program for the Resettlement and Reconstruction of Liberated Territories and in the financing of a first phase, which largely overlapped with the World Bank’s first project, APRP. The key donors 131 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings withdrew after this first intervention because of the rising affluence of the Azerbaijani state, coupled with the emergence of greater postconflict priorities elsewhere. How (and to what extent) has the World Bank • The World Bank’s first project, APRP, was developed and financed jointly by the EU, UNHCR, Group engaged with partners (government, UNDP, and the World Bank Group. humanitarian, and development) in addressing • Afterward, the World Bank mainly engaged with the government through the State Committee forced displaced? on Refugees and IDPs on the policy side, and the SFDI for project implementation. The World Bank’s collaboration and capacity building support to SFDI has been absolutely crucial in building the agency’s capacity. How has the World Bank Group incorporated • The World Bank incorporated lessons from previous projects as it went along, initially financing lessons learned from experience to inform its temporary assistance to IDPs and reconstruction of liberated territories; over time, as the scaling-up of support? situation remained unchanged, the World Bank began to finance and implement socioeconomic microprojects with modest community participation; then it focused on community development with a strong emphasis on participation in the microproject process, and finally, on creating economic opportunities for IDPs. • This evolution reflected a changing political and policy environment as it became increasingly clear that the IDP situation was not all that temporary. An approach that recognized community needs as much as possible and in that way relieved social tensions—that is, engaging communities in the full microproject cycle, and the operation and maintenance of products— was necessary. What has the World Bank Group uniquely • The World Bank brought unique value-added by creating the structure and building the capacity brought to this situation? of the SFDI as its role expanded from that of an agency for providing IDP communities with small infrastructure to a full-fledged community development organization, able to mobilize community resources for improving lives in the IDP communities and in communities nationwide. • The World Bank’s analytical depth and policy support was paramount to the government, which specifically requested that the World Bank implement the third project, with its focus on 132 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings livelihoods. (By then, SFDI had sufficiently strong capacity for the implementation of the microprojects part of the project.) What immediate outcomes related to • In the 2002 study, the World Bank drew the government’s attention to the need to begin government were attained? Highlight addressing the IDP situation beyond transfers and subsidies while waiting to go back. In increased political awareness, government particular, it signaled increasing disillusion, frustration, and psychosocial distress among IDPs, commitments with resource allocation, and raised the potential political risks of insufficient action. improved capacity. • Increased attention by the government to IDPs was also facilitated by increased oil revenues. • The World Bank projects, however, did not achieve any immediate outcomes related to government, nor did they have any such intentions. What immediate outcomes are found in • Immediate outcomes that were planned, and in some cases already realized, relate to the relation to programming for forcibly displaced rehabilitation of key social infrastructure prioritized by communities: better roads, cleaner water, populations and the vulnerable in host better sanitation, and reliable electricity to improve living conditions; community centers to communities (increased programming, strengthen interactions between community members; and vocational training and microcredit balanced attention)? lending to enhance IDPs’ abilities to achieve self-reliant livelihoods. • While keeping in mind the bias that often creeps into satisfaction surveys, limited surveys indicate that microprojects have had a positive effect, and satisfaction varies between 85 and 100 percent. Did the World Bank Group address needs and • Considering the complicated policy and political landscape, the World Bank Group addressed challenges well? Highlight attention to policy the needs and emerging challenges well. The World Bank Group approach addressed the micro- constraints, capacity constraints, financing level needs of IDP communities: small infrastructure, utility upgrading and extension, and asset constraints. generation. • Part of this support was location-specific and therefore temporary (or even humanitarian in nature) to the extent that most beneficiaries were likely to leave for a newly constructed settlement or go home. Still, the infrastructure was likely to continue benefiting the host community. The World Bank support addressed IDP needs that were not covered by the 133 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings government and provided relief that allowed the government to pace its assistance according to available resources (oil and gas revenues). Have intermediate or longer-term outcomes • Intermediate to longer-term outcomes include, first and foremost, ensuring reasonable living or impact been attained? Which outcomes conditions for project beneficiary IDPs, that is, the focus of the supplementary credit under the would likely be promoted (social cohesion, APRP and the IDP-EDS project. That focus is maintained under the ongoing Living Standards economic growth, fiscal stability, security)? Project, but that project will also build earnings capacity for the future, be it in mainstream society or by returning to the occupied territories. 134 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.2. Colombia Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of forced • The conflict fueling displacement in Colombia is a complex interaction of factors involving displacement in the country guerrillas, drugs, paramilitaries, and criminal gangs. Although the conflict has changed over time, and many driving factors make it particularly complex, its roots in the most general sense lie in a fight for control of land and resources. Armed groups have taken control of vast swaths of rural land, some of which they use to cultivate coca, opium poppy, oil palm, and other cash crops. • According to estimates from the Unit for the Victims Assistance and Reparation, 7.4 million people were registered as internally displaced in Colombia as of April 2018, amounting to 15 percent of the country’s population. Estimating the number of IDPs in Colombia has always been contentious, with major differences in numbers and methodologies used by the government and human rights groups. • Displacement has usually been from rural to urban areas, but with the rise of BACRIM in urban areas (criminal bands consisting of paramilitaries resurfacing in diverse groups after disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration), urban-rural and intra- and interurban displacement are on the rise. • There are no displacement camps or collective centers in Colombia. In 2016, most IDPs were living in informal settlements in the country’s 27 largest cities. Overall, IDPs have lower standards of living compared with those who have not been displaced. • Despite the signing of a peace deal and disarmament by FARC, the displacement is unlikely to abate with the ongoing violence of criminal bands and right-wing paramilitaries. What has the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank has been supporting Colombia with the advancement of the peace and understanding of the needs or constraints of development agenda since the mid-1990s, an agenda inextricably linked to the World Bank forcibly displaced populations and host Group’s understanding and thinking on IDPs in Colombia. The conceptual shift started with the communities been? 1998–2002 Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), when violence and conflict moved from a program risk in the logical framework to the central goal of the CAS in Colombia. The goal was 135 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings stated as promoting peace and development by addressing the socioeconomic causes of conflict. • The CAS 2002–08 continued this trend and brought the IDP theme to its forefront by including it under the inclusion and empowerment objective. The 2002 CAS included a grant from the Japan Social Development Fund to support the integration of IDPs and economic sector work to understand their conditions. Under this strategy, the government faced challenging questions about IDPs, such as: (i) Is it better to support resettlement in new locations or to wait until it might be auspicious for them to return home? (ii) How should assets that the displaced left behind be protected? There was no generally accepted answer. As a result, the World Bank and the government decided on three steps: (i) concentrate on integrating social services for the displaced persons; (ii) provide direct support under the Peace and Development Adaptable Program Loan (APL); and (iii) start a systematic process of knowledge building, particularly focused on answering the previous questions. • The World Bank delivered a peace programmatic series assessing the needs of former combatants and vulnerable groups, such as families who lost the main breadwinner, orphan children, people with disabilities, members of ethnic minorities, and adults over age 65—all of them victims of the armed conflict. The study analyzed the best options for fair, viable, and sustainable reintegration and reparation for these groups. • Finally, the World Bank is currently preparing a Peace Lens approach that will permeate its entire operational work in Colombia. The Peace Lens would allow for the inclusion of peace-building considerations in the design and implementation of all World Bank projects in Colombia while retaining the focus on the different priority thematic areas. What financing has the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group has delivered multipronged support consistent with a developmental provided? Describe any programming shifts approach. that are evident. • The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development provided $30 million in 2004 and additional financing of $7.8 million in 2010 for the Peace and Development Project APL, assisting low-income and displaced populations in rural and urban communities in conflict-affected 136 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings regions, with the aim of reducing the risk of their exposure to conflict and mitigating the negative impact of possible derived effects. The design of the project had a threefold purpose. First, to generate new relationship patterns based on positive values through a community- driven development approach facilitated by strong institutions and organizations at the territorial level. Second, to support socioeconomic stabilization of vulnerable and displaced populations living in project regions. As mentioned, these regions were characterized by poverty, and thus, the first project objective was to mitigate these conditions. Finally, the project also had the purpose of mitigating displacement because the theory of change assumed that the relationship patterns, based on positive values paired with socioeconomic stabilization, can play a role in deterring displacement. • Several trust funded operations were associated with the Peace and Development Program: Gender in Peace and Development ($100,000 Gender Trust Fund); Institutional Strengthening of Municipalities with Afro-Descendant Populations ($1.58 million from the Institutional Development Fund); Human Rights in Peace and Development Regional Programs ($400,000 from the Nordic Trust Fund); and Access to Opportunities for Young People ($1.73 million from the Japan Social Development Fund). • The World Bank established the multidonor trust fund (MDTF) as a seed fund aimed to capitalize a partnership with the Swedish International Agency for Development (Sida) and to leverage a larger group of donors interested in the World Bank’s leadership role in peace building and postconflict agendas. The MDTF has received a fund-to-fund contribution of $4 million form the State and Peacebuilding Fund (SPF) and $3.1 from Sida. • The Colombia Social Safety Net Project ($191.2 million), aiming to consolidate and expand the successful Familias en Acción conditional cash transfer program that provided cash to poor households in rural areas conditional on school attendance and visits to health facilities for children, had registered 1.7 million families, including 250,000 displaced families. According to the Implementation Completion and Results Report, “Among the displaced families (who are eligible for the program irrespective of their poverty status), circa 85.0 percent of beneficiaries belong to the poorest two deciles, while another 11.3 percent belong to the next quintile.” 137 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • Support for the Second Phase of Expansion of the Program of Conditional Transfers—Familias en Acción Project ($636.5 million). During appraisal, the program covered about 1.7 million families, including 250,000 displaced. By early 2010, 2.7 million households (including the displaced) were receiving benefits. This expansion of the program was much larger than what the government and the World Bank envisioned during project preparation. Registration was discontinued in 2010 and since then, only displaced families could join the program any time. As of June 2012, 394,000 displaced families are part of the program—14 percent of the total (as of June 2012). • An IDP angle has been included as an explicit objective or mainstreamed in most World Bank projects in the education sector. For instance, the Antioquia Basic Education Project ($40 million), approved in 1998, had as one of its objectives, “improve student learning, access, retention, and learning among the rural and urban poor and at-risk-of-violence communities.” More recently, the Access with Quality in Higher Education Project ($160 million) and its second phase ($400 million) also have a similar objective: “to improve the quality of tertiary education in participating institutions and to increase the enrollment of students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds in quality programs.” The project considers IDPs as meeting the “disadvantaged socioeconomic background” criteria and targets them specifically. As part of its monitoring framework, the project reports on the percent of student loans awarded to displaced individuals. • Smaller projects financed through grant funding included: Protection of Land and Patrimony of IDPs ($5 million), with the objective to promote the application of measures to protect IDPs’ patrimonial assets, provision of land titles for those IDPs whose rights have been protected but do not have legal titles, and proposing public policy initiatives for restitution of properties to IDPs; and the Collective Reparation for Victims through Social Reconstruction Project ($4.2 million) to strengthen and deploy a model for the Collective Reparation Program for victims at the national and local level based on documentation and systematization of the implementation of eligible collective reparation plans. This project receives support from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Peace and Conflict (TF072256). 138 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings With this financing, what has been done? • The World Bank’s support to Colombia was not specifically geared toward IDPs. In fact, apart from the few projects financed by grants, there were no programs specifically targeting IDPs. However, because IDPs constitute the core vulnerable segment of the population, they benefited from human capital and social safety net projects addressing those from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. How has the World Bank Group promoted • The World Bank has not promoted regional solutions because IDPs remain, by and large, within regional-level solutions? Colombian borders. How has the World Bank Group promoted • Displacement disproportionally affects women, children, and minority groups. Nearly 80 percent gender sensitivity? of all Colombian IDPs are women or children under age 18, and 49 percent of displaced households are women-headed compared with the national average of 23 percent. In 2013, 47.7 percent of all newly displaced persons were of Afro-Colombian descent and 23.9 percent belonged to indigenous communities, while these populations, respectively, are 10.6 and 3.4 percent of the national population. • The Protection of Land and Patrimony of IDPs Grant used a restitution methodology that was different for people and communities with diverse types of rights. For instance, restitution for ethnic and indigenous communities followed their collective rights over land. The grant also had a strong gender focus. Has the World Bank Group addressed the • The original Peace and Development Project provided support to the forcibly displaced and host needs of refugees, IDPs, and host communities through two separate components. During implementation, the project team communities in a balanced fashion? witnessed how the development of community-driven subprojects, promoted jointly by vulnerable and displaced population groups, contributed to reintegrate victims of the violence into recipient communities, and promoted reconciliation at the local level. The project confirmed that positive discrimination in favor of individuals affected by the violence, such as IDPs, was not convenient in a community-driven, long-term development program because it broke from community logic and promoted competition for resources, and it could create more risks of exposure for IDPs. Hence, through experience, the World Bank came to address the needs of IDPs and host communities in a balanced fashion. 139 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings Describe the World Bank Group’s Advisory • The World Bank delivered a Peace Programmatic series assessing the needs of the following Services and Analytic work. groups: • Colombia Peace Programmatic I: Demobilization and Reinsertion of Ex-Combatants in Colombia responded to a request by the Colombian government to conduct an assessment of the previous and current approaches to demobilization and reinsertion in Colombia and, in light of national and international experience, to present options to improve the program. • Colombia Peace Programmatic II and III: Reparation for Especially Vulnerable Victims of the Armed Conflict in Colombia focused on especially vulnerable groups that are usually silent, without political voice or representation, and below the radar screen of public opinion: families who lost the main breadwinner, orphan children, people with disabilities, members of ethnic minorities, and adults over age 65—all of them victims of the armed conflict. The study analyzed the best options for fair, viable, and sustainable reparation for these groups. What has the role of other key actors been? • About 20 countries provide aid to Colombia, including 22 UN agencies and three multilateral banks. The government’s Aid Coordination Agency (Agencia Presidencial de Cooperación) keeps records of the different initiatives and their results. • The UN agencies coordinate their humanitarian activities and operate through a joint United Nations Development Assistance Framework—a strategic, medium-term results framework that describes the collective vision and response of the UN system to national development priorities. How (and to what extent) has the World Bank • The World Bank has coordinated closely with others, reflected in the fact that World Bank pilots Group engaged with partners (government, were later scaled up with funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), humanitarian, development) in addressing and lessons learned from USAID-funded pilots are now being used to design the World Bank– forced displaced? funded activities to improve the cadastre. • The World Bank also coordinated with the EU on territorial development when implementing the Peace and Development Project. The project, in fact, was considered by the EU to be the government’s contribution to the EU-funded Laboratorios de Paz, and both projects had the same implementation mechanisms and worked with the same entities in the field. Because of 140 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings this, the projects also had joint monitoring and evaluation, which led to deep knowledge of results in the field. How has the World Bank Group incorporated • The question does not apply because the World Bank has not really scaled up its support in lessons learned from experience to inform its relation to IDPs; rather, IDPs were targeted as a particularly vulnerable category throughout the scaling-up of support? World Bank’s human development and social safety net projects. What has the World Bank Group uniquely • Several interviewees from government and other humanitarian and development agencies noted brought to this situation? that the World Bank Group’s value-added has been bringing attention and convening power around protection of land and patrimony of IDPs and subsequently developing the institutional framework and capacity for addressing the issue. What immediate outcomes related to • The creation of the Land Restitution Unit constitutes the main outcome that the World Bank government were attained? Highlight Group has attained with respect to government. The World Bank’s support to protecting IDP increased political awareness, government lands started out by finding ways to determine who had abandoned what. The difficulty in commitments with resource allocation, establishing this came from the fact that displacement occurred in areas with little state improved capacity. presence, where there was no land registry, cadastre, or formal land market. The methodology was based on social cartography, whereby IDPs from the same community gathered to map out the land use and land rights in their communities. The methodology was used to inventory about 4 million hectares of land and set the grounds for the Land Protection Unit. Part of this support has been financed through the Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Peace and Post-Conflict. • The second phase of support started in 2006, where the first Unique Property Registry (Registro Único de Propiedades) was created, which identified the family unit that had possession, property, occupation, or tenancy rights over land. • The World Bank supported the creation of the land restitution unit, helping to institutionalize processes of land restitution. With State and Peacebuilding Fund (SPF) funding, the unit hired a company to select personnel, recruiting 1,500 people in 17 offices throughout 21 departments. Currently, the World Bank does not provide direct financial support to lands institutions but provides technical assistance for the development of a cadastre to be used as an input to the land formalization process. 141 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings What immediate outcomes are found in • The World Bank has had salient outcomes regarding programming. These are relation to programming for forcibly displaced • The Peace and Development Project as an example of balanced attention to the needs of populations and the vulnerable in host IDPs and host communities during conflict communities (increased programming, • Supporting the development of a collective reparations approach to IDPs within the balanced attention)? government Victim’s Unit • Bringing attention to protection of land and patrimony of IDPs and subsequently developing the institutional framework and capacity for addressing the issue • Including an IDP angle in education and social safety net projects • Operationalization of a Peace Lens approach in its operations with the goal of inclusion of peace-building considerations into all aspects of operational work in Colombia. Did the World Bank Group address needs and • Given the demand-driven model under which it works, the World Bank Group has addressed challenges well? Highlight attention to policy some challenges such as land restitution. However, others remain unaddressed, such as the fiscal constraints, capacity constraints, financing space needed for implementing the Victims Law, which aims to restore millions of acres of land constraints? to internally displaced Colombians and provide reparations—including financial compensation— to victims of human rights violations and infractions of international humanitarian law. Have intermediate or longer-term outcomes • As mentioned, the World Bank achieved outcomes in the following areas which are likely to or impact been attained? Which outcomes promote social cohesion: would likely be promoted (social cohesion, • Balanced attention to the needs of IDPs and host communities during conflict economic growth, fiscal stability, security)? • Access to education and social safety nets without discrimination • Development of a Peace Lens approach to World Bank operational work in Colombia • Bringing attention to protection of land and patrimony of IDPs and subsequently developing the institutional framework and capacity for addressing the issue • Support to a collective reparations approach. 142 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.3. Ethiopia Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Ethiopia hosts the fifth largest refugee population in the world and the second largest in Africa after forced displacement in the Uganda—855,000 refugees. There are also an estimated 450,000 Ethiopians displaced within the country. country • The ethnic breakdown of the three largest groups of refugees is as follows: (i) 350,000 South Sudanese refugees (an ongoing and growing crisis) living in the Gambela region along the southwestern borders, 90 percent of whom are women and children. They are largely illiterate, with a background in subsistence agriculture, and long-standing tension with the host community outnumbered by the refugee community because of the raids from groups in South Sudan to steal cattle; (ii) 250,000 Somali refugees living in the Somali region along the eastern border, most of them arriving after the 2008 drought. There are marked differences in their background, geographic, and clan origin, and their industriousness is hampered by isolation and no access to land; (iii) 150,000 Eritrean refugees who are young, male, and single, with most on their way to other destinations; 40 percent stay in camps for less than three months and 80 percent for less than a year; 25 percent are unaccompanied minors. • Most of the refugees are accommodated at 27 camps along Ethiopia’s borders—near the borders of their home countries—in isolated and lagging regions and are expected to remain in camps. They do not have the right to work and survive on humanitarian aid, with food provided by the World Food Programme (WFP) and nonfood items (NFIs) by UNHCR. Twenty thousand refugees reside in Addis Ababa and other urban centers. • The country is likely to receive further inflows of refugees because of the instability and conflict plaguing its neighbors. The government of Ethiopia has realized the limitations of the encampment policy and embarked on an ambitious reform program aimed at eventual socioeconomic inclusion of refugees and closure of all refugee camps in the next 10 years (the nine pledges made in 2016). What has the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank Group’s Country Partnership Framework for 2018–22 presents a thorough analysis of the understanding of the needs or refugee issue in an Informational Annex on Forced Displacement in Ethiopia . constraints of forcibly displaced • Three distinct ethnic groups of refugees, their host communities, and the sustainability prospects of each populations and host situation are analyzed. In general, the absence of socioeconomic rights combined with shrinking communities been? humanitarian resources and concentration of refugees in the harsh physical environment leaves refugees 143 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings with few livelihood options. Host communities, except for the Tigray region hosting Eritrean refugees, are mostly very poor, with little access to basic services. • The situation of South Sudanese refugees—90 percent are women and children and 19 percent are unaccompanied minors—is the most difficult. In the Gambela region, a major effort is needed to help build the human capital of South Sudanese refugees and support the host population. Because their economic integration prospects are extremely limited, the focus would continue to be on emergency response. • For Somalis, the situation varies across subgroups—some have the potential to access out-of-camp opportunities, local integration, and greater economic inclusion, while others may require help to build their human capital. • Eritreans stand to gain the most from the implementation of an effective out-of-camp approach that combines freedom of movement (and residence), work permits, skills development, and the creation of job opportunities. • The World Bank Group has not analyzed the needs of Ethiopian IDPs. High levels of existing vulnerability in rural populations, severe droughts, ongoing conflict, proliferation of arms, political exploitation of ethnic and cultural differences, and already high numbers of displaced people create a high-risk environment in which new displacements are bound to continue. What financing has the World • The World Bank Group has provided a $100 million Development Response to Displacement Impact Project Bank Group provided? Describe (DRDIP) investment loan with the objective “to improve access to basic social services, expand economic any programming shifts that are opportunities, and enhance environmental management for communities hosting refugees.” evident. • Although the International Development Association (IDA) is the largest provider of Ethiopia’s official development assistance—the commitment for 2018 is $1.8 billion—the government is not willing to borrow for projects designed specifically for refugees. The current generation of projects has few links with host communities. • Ethiopia was assessed as eligible to receive financing from the Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities funded under IDA’s 18th Replenishment. The Ethiopia Economic Opportunities Program includes the integration of refugees into the government’s industrialization program, providing employment to refugees. This is an evolution in World Bank support from the Development Response to Displacement 144 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings Impacts Project in the Horn of Africa, which targeted refugee-hosting communities and likely benefited refugees indirectly, to targeted and direct support. With this financing, what has • The DRDIP investment loan ($100 million) targets communities in refugee-hosting areas that have seen been done? protracted presence of refugees, with project investments potentially benefiting both host and refugee communities. It has three major funding components covering social and economic services and infrastructure, sustainable environmental management, and livelihoods programs. • The project embeds the essential features of ensuring citizen participation and engagement in identifying and prioritizing developmental needs, improving social cohesion between refugees and refugee-hosting communities, increasing citizen voice and role in development decision-making, and eliciting greater demand for social accountability. • In Ethiopia, the project is implemented in five refugee-hosting regions, including Afar, Benishangul-Gumuz, Ethiopian Somali, Gambela, and Tigray National Regional States—covering all groups of refugees and host communities. It covers 16 woredas (administrative divisions) with camps located in them and all the kebeles (neighborhood) in those woredas (about 80 in all). • The Ethiopia Economic Opportunities Program includes the integration of refugees into the government’s industrialization program, providing employment to refugees. Lessons learned from the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results were taken into consideration— acknowledging the need for continuous policy dialogue and incremental reforms. However, the design relies on the government acting on the nine pledges it made in 2016. How has the World Bank Group • Analytics: A joint World Bank–UNHCR study, Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa , promoted regional-level was undertaken with the World Bank’s regional approach to the Horn of Africa (Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, solutions? Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda) and to support UNHCR’s strategic shift in addressing the needs of the displaced populations from “care and maintenance” to “social cohesion and self-reliance.” • Programs: Findings and recommendations of the study were used to design the DRDIP project, conceived with a regional perspective, supporting Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Uganda. Kenya has joined in the second phase of the project (DRDIP II). 145 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD): The World Bank committed $3 million in financing to IGAD to act as the Regional Secretariat for Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa, with the purpose of generating knowledge and convening governments in the region. How has the World Bank Group • The report Forced Displaced and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa recognizes that “displaced and migrant promoted gender sensitivity? populations in general, but women in particular, confront a range of severe protection challenges emerging from a constellation of poverty, uncertainty, insecurity, conflict, and flight. Gender-based violence (GBV) is a pervasive challenge across the Horn of Africa, particularly in those countries affected by persistent conflict.” A separate section discusses GBV in the context of displacement, noting also the prevalence of intimate partner violence in camp settings and outlining some measures to address the issue. • The DRDIP states in its appraisal report the commitment to a holistic approach to address gender issues. Recognizing that women’s participation in the project’s processes is constrained by social structures and cultural norms, the project aims for community mobilization, consultations, trainings, institution building, and leadership to tackle the issue. Although woreda and kebele authorities are usually all or mostly men, kebele- level committees determining the plans are required to have 30 percent representation of women. The initial community-driven development annual plans have a high proportion of potable water points and school improvements, which are items of higher priority for women than men. Has the World Bank Group • Forced Displaced and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa discusses the needs of refugees, IDPs, and host addressed the needs of refugees, communities in the Horn of Africa in a holistic manner. IDPs, and host communities in a • Through its DRDIP, the World Bank Group addresses predominantly the needs of host communities because balanced fashion? the government is reluctant to borrow for projects designed specifically to benefit refugees. At this stage, the project has only peripheral benefits for refugee communities. • The World Bank Group is likely to address the needs of refugees through the 18th Replenishment of IDA (IDA18) Sub-Window, and $200 million would be allocated for Ethiopia’s Economic Opportunities Program, a $3.8 billion project. Additionally, the World Bank program under preparation is likely to include a Program- for-Results program that will include, among other things, agreement with the government on legislative action on the nine pledges as part of its adherence to the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF). Because the government is beginning to realize that the jobs program for refugees needs to go 146 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings beyond those that could become available in the parks, given the likely difficulty of matching the skills set of the refugees to those in demand in the parks, the World Bank is considering an approach that would pay private service providers to match refugees with jobs. The World Bank program is also likely to include a $3 million allocation for the Administration for Refugee and Return Affairs (ARRA) —the agency that currently administers the refugee camps—to support its implementation of the CRRF road map. Describe the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank Group and UNHCR have jointly produced the report Forced Displacement and Mixed Advisory Services and Analytic Migration in the Horn of Africa. The study analyzing the forced displacement and development nexus aims to work. explore the mixed migration phenomenon, assess the impacts of refugees and migrants on hosting areas and communities, identify ongoing innovative interventions, and propose entry points and practical steps to address the development dimensions of these issues in the Horn of Africa. However, it raises an important caveat because solutions and recommendations are at the regional level, with some country-specific references where appropriate. The study acknowledges that deeper analysis, which has not yet been done in Ethiopia, would be required before the development of country-specific solutions and recommendations. • The World Bank has also prepared an annex, “Informational Annex on Forced Displacement in Ethiopia,” to the Country Partnership Framework for Ethiopia FY18–22 discussing challenges and opportunities and the current policy space associated with refugees. What has the role of other key • UNHCR: UNHCR coordinates humanitarian support for refugees in Ethiopia and works with 47 different actors been? partner agencies to make sure that services are provided. So far, only 8 percent of UNHCR’s 2018 budget for Ethiopia is funded ($28 million of $335.8 million). UNHCR is deeply engaged in a policy dialogue (jointly with the World Bank through the CRRF and the Economic Opportunities program) to encourage the government to adopt the legislation and move its policies in the new direction. • ARRA: ARRA is part of National Intelligence and Security Service, operating with a great degree of autonomy and funded by UNHCR. ARRA runs camps, and the day-to-day operations seem to work well. In the Tigray region visited by the World Bank’s evaluation mission, there was no evidence of any tension or hostility between the ARRA officials and the refugees. ARRA has its own security and intelligence services and provides the judicial mechanism in the camps, as well. 147 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • WFP: As one of the key humanitarian agencies, WFP currently assists 600,000 refugees from Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, and Sudan. Together with ARRA, WFP provides a monthly food ration of cereals, iodized salt, and vegetable oil. It supports selected refugee households with livelihood activities such as vegetable gardening and poultry farming. Along with ARRA and UNHCR, WFP is implementing biometric verification to ensure that the assistance is cost-efficient and goes to those who need it the most. • EU: EU development cooperation support exceeds €2 billion for the period 2014–20 and rests on four pillars: (i) programmable development aid from the European Development Fund of more than €1 billion in programs under implementation or in preparation for the period 2014–20 in four areas: agriculture and food security, health, transport and energy, and governance; (ii) nonprogrammable development aid from the different EU thematic instruments, such as civil society, democracy and human rights, stability and peace, global funds, and other facilities; (iii) projects funded by the EU Trust Fund for Africa addressing the root causes of irregular migration, displacement of population, and instability; and (iv) concessional loans of the European Investment Bank in water, energy, and credit line facilities. • USAID: With planned assistance of $226.8 million for FY19, USAID’s portfolio is one of the largest and most complex in Africa, supporting agriculture and food security; local governance and access to justice; enhancing education access, equity, quality and relevance; improving overall health; promoting gender equality; water and sanitation programs; and supporting government and civil society interaction to improve conflict management policies and practices. How (and to what extent) has the • A Development Partners Working Group on Forced Displacement is part of the regular donor coordination World Bank Group engaged with mechanism in place in Addis Ababa. It is headed by UNHCR, and the World Bank participates in meetings. partners (government, The World Bank’s key partner in forced displacement in Ethiopia is UNHCR as part of the broader World Bank humanitarian, development) in Group–UNHCR partnership to complement humanitarian and development approaches in refugee issues. addressing forced displaced? • The World Bank has a close policy dialogue with the government to support its major policy shift and create a political space for the government to show the substantial benefits of the new policy to the nonrefugee population. Ethiopia will be one of the first beneficiary countries of the new IDA Regional Sub-Window for Refugees and Host Communities. 148 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings How has the World Bank Group • In its response to forced displacement in Ethiopia through DRDIP, the World Bank seems to adapt primarily incorporated lessons learned the lessons learned from its wide community-driven development experience rather than the experience from experience to inform its related to specific displacement issues. scaling-up of support? • The World Bank is relatively new to forced displacement work in Ethiopia, and it has positioned itself wisely in supporting the government’s gradual shift from encampment to long-term economic integration. Its support will be pertinent to the medium-term agenda, starting with the support for a jobs compact operation to create economic opportunities for refugees and host communities. • Lessons learned from the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results were incorporated into the Ethiopia Economic Opportunities Program and allows for continuous policy dialogue and incremental reforms. What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank’s commitment to supporting the Ethiopian government as it moves from a decades-long uniquely brought to this encampment policy to a sustainable economic and social integration of refugees is crucial, particularly as a situation? source of solid policy advice. • Through its DRDIP and study of forced displacement and mixed migration, the World Bank has brought in a regional perspective, which it has further fostered through IGAD. What immediate outcomes • The government has made the much-publicized nine pledges aimed at integrating refugees into the related to government were economic and social fabric of Ethiopia. attained? Highlight increased • The Parliament so far has not adopted the legally binding Comprehensive Proclamation translating these political awareness, government pledges into law, but the government is likely to receive substantial financial and technical backing from commitments with resource donor countries and multilateral organizations when the pledges are formalized. allocation, improved capacity. 149 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings What immediate outcomes are • The focus of DRDIP (the main current forced displaced program in Ethiopia) is on host communities; so far, found in relation to programming no programming in relation to the forcibly displaced has been done. for forcibly displaced populations • Indicators are not disaggregated to show how the most vulnerable in the host communities are benefiting. and the vulnerable in host • Indicators for DRDIP are disaggregated by gender (percent female) for the core indicator on direct project communities (increased beneficiaries. programming, balanced attention)? • All indicators are disaggregated by country because the program is regional. Did the World Bank Group • The World Bank is focusing only on the needs of host communities at the moment. Although community- address needs and challenges driven development programs seem to be working, there is less traction on livelihoods and environment well? Highlight attention to policy components, partly because few steps have been taken to bring microfinance institutions and rural credit constraints, capacity constraints, institutions into the program framework. The implementation capacity of woredas is low, and so far, the financing constraints? capacity training has not gone beyond providing the PCU with the items it needs, and training materials related to the project. Have intermediate or longer-term • Given the early stage of implementation, no intermediate or longer-term outcomes have been attained. outcomes or impact been • The World Bank Group aspires to improve access to basic social services, expand economic opportunities, attained? Which outcomes would and enhance environmental management for communities hosting refugees in Ethiopia. The project also likely be promoted (social aspires to the citizens participating and engaging in the process of identifying and prioritizing their cohesion, economic growth, fiscal developmental needs, improving social cohesion between refugees and refugee-hosting communities (no stability, security)? measure in the results framework), and eliciting a greater demand for social accountability. None of these is measured in the results framework, which focuses on community-driven development output indicators. 150 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.4. Iraq Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Iraq had about 2.6 million IDPs as of January 2018—about 7 percent of its population, reflecting a long forced displacement in the history of conflict, starting in the early 2000s, with heighted conflict and international military operations in country 2003–2006, and the onset of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in December 2013 marked a new wave of displacements that raised the number of IDPs to 3.3 million in 2014 and 2015, a number that declined to the current level with the ousting of ISIS from Mosul. • The number of refugees in Iraq has been more stable except for the large jump triggered by the Syrian civil war. Numbers ranged within 40,000 to 50,000 between 2003 and 2008, declined to about 35,000 between 2009 and 2010, and rose sharply during 2012 and 2013 to about 270,000 between 2014 and 2016 (the last year with UN data). In Iraq, 0.88 percent of refugees are Syrian. What has the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank reinitiated operations after in 2003 (after a hiatus since 1990). Before 2014, the World Bank understanding of the needs or Group did not analyze IDP issues. constraints of forcibly displaced • Attention to IDPs increased with the FY13–17 Country Partnership Strategy (CPS), which discussed IDPs populations and host pressure on urban services (in Baghdad), their marginalized condition, and the challenge they pose for social communities been? safety nets. • IDP needs: The 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic discussed IDP and refugee issues at some length. The study noted that consumption of IDPs per capita has shrunk by twice as much as that of the population at large and identified some of the most salient IDP needs: • Housing: The situation is particularly severe in those governorates where many of the 3.2 million IDPs have sought shelter. The massive inflow of IDPs has created a huge demand for new housing units (more than 500,000 units), mainly in and around urban areas. Housing supply has not kept pace with demand, creating tensions between IDPs and their host communities. The return of IDPs to their homes is hindered by the growing number of housing units that have been damaged or destroyed in areas affected by the conflict with ISIS (World Bank 2015b). • Health: The deteriorating security situation since June 2014 has further reduced access to health care among displaced populations. The influx of IDPs has led to a significant increase in demand for health 151 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings services, challenging the health sector. Basic services in health facilities in IDP camps are either nonexistent or insufficiently equipped to handle the growing demand. Acute respiratory infections, skin diseases, and acute diarrhea remain the leading causes of morbidity in all camps. There has been a resurgence of polio (after 14 years during which Iraq was polio-free) and other infectious diseases (for example, leishmaniasis) among the local population. • Education: Within camps, only 50 percent of displaced children attend school; the numbers are worse outside of the camps, with only 30 percent of displaced children attending school. Twenty percent of school-age children have dropped out of the education system in 2015–17, including more than 2 million displaced children and children from host communities, partly because of the closure of 23 percent of schools during the 2015–16 academic year. • Access to services: Nearly one-fifth of displaced families have lost key identity documents that are essential for access to education, medical, and social services as well as to Iraq’s main social safety net, the Public Distribution System. IDPs tend to be concentrated in urban areas and in a few governorates where they have little access to services, education, jobs, and social security. • Returnees: Returnees face all of these risks, compounded by security breakdown, a widespread militia presence, and the targeting of people of specific ethnicities (UNOCHA 2015). • Host communities: Because of the ISIS insurgency in 2014, the Kurdistan regional government requested the World Bank to prepare the economic and social impact assessment of the Syrian conflict and ISIS insurgency on host communities. Gross domestic product (GDP) growth declined from 8 percent in 2013 to 3 percent in 2014. Prices and unemployment increased. More refugees and IDPs entering the labor market were pushing wages down. The economic and social impact assessment estimated that the Kurdistan Region of Iraq’s (KRI) poverty rate increased from 3.5 percent to 8.1 percent, while the overall cost of the refugees and IDPs to the host community was estimated at $1.4 billion. The cost of stabilizing effect on human development—including health, education, social safety net, and food security—was put at $834 million, or about 3.5 percent of GDP. What financing has the World • Since its reengagement in 2003, the World Bank has provided $5.2 billion in financing through investment Bank Group provided? Describe project financing and development policy operations. As of March 2017, the World Bank’s portfolio for Iraq 152 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings any programming shifts that are consisted of 11 operations for a total net commitment of $1.11 billion for FY18. Only one small project (the evident. $2.7 million Youth Project) specifically directed financing to IDPs. • In FY18, the Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project was approved. It represents a shift in the World Bank’s programming in Iraq. The project directly supports IDPs and returnees. The operation uses labor-intensive public works and a social safety net program to include IDPs and returnees, for example, through registration, enrollment, eligibility verification, and payment delivery. It the essentially supports cash- for-work programs for vulnerable Iraqis, including IDPs and returnees (World Bank 2018a). With this financing, what has • The World Bank has provided $5.2 billion of financing for projects on governance (about 56.4 percent, been done? including a $2.8 billion budget support development policy operations), reconstruction and growth (29.1 percent), and social services (14.5 percent). The work is in progress to repair bridges, roads, electricity, water, and wastewater networks and deliver health services in the seven municipal areas that have been liberated from ISIS by the government forces. The World Bank extended primarily investment project financing, though there were two development policy operations. Although these focused on development issues (for example, the Social Protection System) and not specifically on IDPs, they could reach IDPs directly or indirectly (there is no evidence to tell). • In FY17–18, the World Bank financed two projects that targeted IDPs, returnees and host communities: the Promoting the Inclusion of Conflict-Affected Iraqi Youth Project in FY17 ($2.8 million) and the Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project ($200 million). How has the World Bank Group • There are two tasks in the World Bank Group’s program with regional dimensions. A Post Conflict Fund (PCF) promoted regional-level activity covered Ta’leem Regional Education Initiative for Displaced Iraqis in Jordan and Lebanon (TF091491). solutions? The PCF grant was awarded to Save the Children to support and learn from Ta’leem activities in both Jordan and Lebanon. It provided financing (leveraged by other funding) for early childhood education (Jordan and Lebanon), basic education (Lebanon only), and youth and adolescent work (Lebanon only). This World Bank– supported program was designed to promote regional shared learning and documentation of experiences while experimenting with both similar and different approaches relevant to each country’s needs. • Another regional ASA activity was completed, Economic Integration in the Mashreq. 153 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings How has the World Bank Group • In contrast to IDP issues, the World Bank Group sought to mainstream gender issues because of Iraq’s promoted gender sensitivity? significant gender disparities, reflected in World Bank Group’s gender analyses. Programming attention to gender increased as the World Bank progressed beyond its reengagement efforts. A gender portfolio review in the CPS reveals a moderate mainstreaming of gender issues. There is no analysis of the gender dimensions of IDP issues. • Analytics: The World Bank Group’s 2015 performance and learning review summarized findings from its 2014 Poverty and Inclusion Assessment highlighting the significant gender challenges that could be exacerbated by the ongoing security situation: • Early motherhood associated with poor nutritional outcomes • Significant gender disparities in gross enrollment at each education level • Low labor force participation of adult Iraqi women (at only 15 percent, well below the already low labor force participation in the Middle East and North Africa) • Significant gender wage gap creating further impediments to women’s labor force participation. • Iraq’s 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic has a separate section focused on excluded groups, namely IDPs, youth, and women. The report explains economic, cultural, and social constraints and the deterioration of security situation negatively affecting girls’ and women’s labor force participation and human capital outcomes. • Programming: The CPS gender review of the Iraq portfolio suggest a moderate mainstreaming of gender issues. • Gender/displacement interface: The 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic notes, “Years of protracted violence have created changes in family structure and a deterioration of child welfare. Women and children are the most heavily affected by the crisis, with 49 percent of IDPs being under the age of 18. There are an estimated 1.6 million widows, an increased number of female-headed households, and large numbers of orphans.” Although there is little specificity on the displacement and gender interface because of the lack of data on displaced households, the gendered nature of conflict is recognized. • The Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project supports the government’s development agenda, which recognizes the role and contribution of female labor force participation to economic 154 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings growth. The project targets female-specific constraints and vulnerabilities (for example, legal, structural, and social barriers to political and economic development) through tailored cash-for-work programs. The program also provides psychosocial support for survivors of gender-based violence (World Bank 2018a). Has the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group’s ASA done at the Kurdistan regional government’s request calculated the cost of addressed the needs of refugees, hosting IDPs and refugees. The 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic dedicates a section to IDPs’ needs and IDPs, and host communities in a vulnerabilities. balanced fashion? • The World Bank’s support has evolved over time from projects—particularly those on health, education, social protection, and water—which may or may not have reached IDPs and/or refugees. There is no evidence on the extent to which the projects effectively reached these groups because IDPs were not monitored or targeted in these projects. Recently a small project ($2.8 million) was approved which explicitly targets IDP youth. In FY18, the Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project ($200 million) was approved which directly targets IDPs and returnees. Describe the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank Group covered IDPs and refugees in six ASA tasks: the 2011 Confronting Poverty in Iraq Advisory Services and Analytic study; the 2014 The Unfulfilled Promise of Oil and Growth: Poverty, Inclusion, and Welfare in Iraq, 2007 –2012, work. the 2015 Economic and Social Impact Assessment for the Kurdistan regional government, the 2015 “Kurdistan Region of Iraq: Reforming The Economy For Shared Prosperity and Protecting the Vulnerable”, a 2016 policy research working paper on “The Welfare and Distributional Impacts of the Twin Crises in Iraq 2014,” and the 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic. What has the role of other key • Iraq received $40 billion in official development assistance from 21 donors between 2007 and 2016. The actors been? World Bank and the UN led coordination efforts covering multiple actors. Coordination efforts began with the UN-World Bank Group 2003 Joint Needs Assessment that informed the Madrid donor coordination conference that year. Later efforts sought to engage the government to take the lead on coordination. These efforts faced difficulties of coordination within the government. Despite achieving progress through the years, government donor coordination leadership continues to face capacity constraints, and coordination among donors has faltered on some programs. Donor roles overlap across sectors. 155 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • The key donors by volume of financial transfers are the USAID, Canada, Germany, Japan (Japan International Cooperation Agency), the World Bank, the EU, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Authority. • A consolidated account of roles covering all donors is not available. The CPS prepared a matrix that shows multiple donors in most sectors. Several cover both development and humanitarian issues. Both roles (that is, humanitarian and development) are relevant to IDPs. The UN implements projects addressing a wide range of humanitarian issues, and IDPs are covered under its objectives to reach people in need and, more specifically, to facilitate safe and dignified returns., for example, as part of the UN Humanitarian Response Plan. The World Bank Group can reach IDPs through support for growth and service delivery. How (and to what extent) has the • Although the World Bank Group has interacted with partners, there is no evidence of the World Bank using World Bank Group engaged with its convening power to address issues of forced displacement other than in the 2003 Joint Needs Assessment partners (government, done jointly with the UN. humanitarian, development) in • At the request of the Kurdistan regional government, the World Bank Group estimated the costs of addressing forced displaced? addressing IDP and refugee issues in Kurdistan. • The World Bank partnered with Save the Children to support early childhood education, basic education, and youth and adolescent work for Iraqi refugees in Jordan and Lebanon through its Peacebuilding Fund. How has the World Bank Group • With no completed projects directed specifically to IDPs or refugees, there were no relevant lessons or incorporated lessons learned opportunities for expanding project support. The Kurdistan regional government study on the costs of IDPs from experience to inform its provides a framework on analytical support for other situations of forced displacement that may arise, as well scaling-up of support? as possible project support to address those needs. What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group brought in its analytical capacity to assess the impact of displacement on host uniquely brought to this communities and estimate the welfare impact of the twin ISIS-OIL price impact on IDPs. situation? What immediate outcomes • The Interim Strategy Note 1 that the World Bank Group prepared on reengagement assigned immediacy to related to government were results on institutional capacity, economic recovery, essential services, and the groundwork for development attained? Highlight increased planning. The 2015 performance and learning review, which responded to two shocks (escalation of conflict 156 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings political awareness, government and declining oil prices), assigned immediacy to results on service delivery and fiscal conditions. These results commitments with resource addressed IDP and refugee issues to the extent that services enabled by World Bank Group support reach allocation, improved capacity. IDPs. World Bank Group results did not seek political or private sector awareness of IDPs, immediate or otherwise. The World Bank Group sought to strengthen attention to governance, growth, and social inclusion and poverty reduction, but these aims were not articulated as immediate. Similarly, on public expenditure, the World Bank Group aimed at changes in oil revenue management, expenditure planning, increased share of investment expenditures, and increased efficiency of capital expenditures. These would also take time to materialize. There were no immediate results sought or attained on IDPs or refugees specifically. What immediate outcomes are • The World Bank Group did not plan on specific outcomes for forcibly displaced and vulnerable populations found in relation to programming in host communities. Overall, government attention to IDPs and refugees was covered in broad social for forcibly displaced populations services programs. Articulation of these programs began with the government’s 2005–07 National and the vulnerable in host Development Strategy. These plans did not provide an indication of how balanced the attention to the communities (increased forcibly displaced populations and the vulnerable was to be. programming, balanced attention)? Did the World Bank Group • Because FY03–16 projects did not have an IDP-specific approach, there was no particular alignment with address needs and challenges Iraq’s IDP needs other than the attention derived from the sector issues (for example, education, health, and well? Highlight attention to policy water) that the World Bank Group addressed. Alignment with IDP needs was most specific through ASA constraints, capacity constraints, activities. The World Bank Group, through its ASA on the KRI, calculated the cost of hosting IDPs and financing constraints? refugees at the request of the KRI. The World Bank Group’s 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic highlighted IDP and refugee needs. Some projects (for example, in education and health) considered gender aspects. These, however, were not specific to IDPs or refugees. Projects on education, health, social protection, and water could reach IDPs or refugees in those areas, but it is not known to what extent, if any, because IDPs were not targeted or monitored in all but one World Bank Group project. Investments in reconstruction could presumably employ IDPs. ICF financing could also help IDP employment. However, World Bank Group interventions would be unlikely to address all IDP needs (for example, on property rights). Have intermediate or longer-term • The World Bank’s broad objectives have been reconstruction, governance, growth, and services. Governance outcomes or impact been covers fiscal sustainability, on which the two public financial management projects and the two development 157 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings attained? Which outcomes would policy operations have a bearing. The Interim Strategy Notes CPS, performance and learning review, and likely be promoted (social projects did not articulate security objectives. The World Bank monitored security conditions because these cohesion, economic growth, fiscal have been critical for its operations, but it did not target a security objective. As discussed, security stability, security)? deteriorated in 2003, 2006, and 2013, with periods of relative calm in between. The World Bank did not monitor social cohesion or include it as an objective, though improved governance could have a positive effect on it. The overarching goal of the Social Fund for Development Project is to deepen stabilization efforts in Iraq, restore citizen-state trust, and institute measures to strengthen social cohesion and local development priorities. 158 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.5. Jordan Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Jordan has historically seen successive waves of refugee influx, from Palestine (1948–50), the West Bank and forced displacement in the Gaza (1967), Iraq (1990–91 and 2003), and now the Syrian Arab Republic (2011 to present). country • Refugees are protected by a memorandum of understanding signed in 1998 between the UNHCR and the government, stating that asylum seekers can remain in Jordan for six months after recognition and during which time the UNHCR has to find a resettlement country for them. In practice, Syrian refugees cross the border into Jordan informally, most of them register with UNHCR to benefit from food and shelter, and they seek employment without work permits. • As of January 2018, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees had registered 655,624 Syrian refugees in Jordan. Jordanian officials claim that there may be hundreds of thousands of unregistered refugees in the country. • Jordan has three official refugee camps: Zaatari, Azraq, and Mrajeed al Fhood. Although more than 100,000 refugees remain in the camps, most Syrian refugees live alongside Jordanians in host communities. Most live in the capital Amman and other major cities. What has the World Bank Group’s • A joint report (World Bank–UNHCR) analyzed the socioeconomic profile, poverty, and vulnerability of understanding of the needs or refugees, evaluated current policies, and discussed prospects for policy reforms. Among its findings, the constraints of forcibly displaced research suggested a profile for a typical refugee family in Jordan. Compared with a host family, a refugee populations and host family is young, has a low level of education, and a much higher proportion of children and female-headed communities been? households. Syrian female refugees are more likely to be married under the age of 18. • Refugees are monetarily vulnerable and food insecure. They live in crowded conditions, spend a large share of their earnings on rent, and feel exploited by landlords who charge high rental prices for ill-maintained accommodations. They sometimes forego food or go into debt to pay rent, or they rent low-quality housing so that they can afford meals. • The impact of refugees on employment is not well understood. World Bank–UNHCR research suggests that Syrian refugees are largely concentrated in the construction sector, and there is little scope of competition with the host community. Recent comments by government officials suggest that refugees arrive in Jordan 159 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings with skills that are complementary to the skills of Jordanians and Jordanian unemployment does not increase. • The World Bank’s support for work permits did not account for the disincentives for formal labor market participation (even with a planned information campaign). For refugees, these include paying income tax, the hassle of obtaining and renewing permits (although the World Bank has pushed for incremental reforms in this area), and fear of losing UNHCR aid. For employers, disincentives include having to pay minimum wage or offer other protections. The assumption of job creation due to reconstruction has proven unrealistic. • Host communities in Jordan face the economic and social burden of the refugee crisis. The crisis affected service delivery heavily at the municipal level in Jordan. Refugee demands increased pressure on strained public services, and infrastructure often affected the local populations negatively. What financing has the World • Jordan has received financing from IBRD and IDA (on an exceptional basis), the SPF, trust funds specific to Bank Group provided? Describe the Middle East and North Africa Region, multidonor trust funds (MDTFs), and the Global Concessional any programming shifts that are Financing Facility (GCFF). In total, $253 million in concessional financing has supported $1 billion worth of evident. projects in Jordan—a rate of roughly $4 for every $1 in concessional financing. • Two projects, both in 2014 ($200 million), supported the host community only. The projects sought to address the perception of limited support targeting host communities under stress from the large influx of Syrian refugees, to short-circuit any rising tensions, and “to ensure adequate links between humanitarian assistance being provided to refugees and the developmental challenges facing the country.” • The World Bank Group has invested in a wide range of sectors supporting refugees and host communities, including operations promoting employment opportunities, equitable growth, and job creation as well as support for legal aid, emergency health care, education, energy, water and municipal services, and youth social services. With this financing, what has • The majority of World Bank Group support focused on the following: been done? 160 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • Health services: vaccines, drugs, and sustained provision of primary and secondary health care to refugees and poor Jordanians, as well as a close focus on identifying and addressing gender barriers to quality health care • Basic needs: subsidies on bread and liquified petroleum gas, for example, which, with universal targeting, directly benefits refugees • Municipal services: in governates with large refugee populations—provided through targeted, flexible block grants to mayors, with an emphasis on solid waste; local roads; street cleaning; parks and recreational spaces; and community services municipal services (with livelihood potential) • Education: the expansion of early childhood education and improvement in access and quality of basic and secondary education with specific targets for the number of Syrian refugee children enrolled in target schools; support for a comprehensive reform of the Jordanian education system; and improved school climate in schools with a high proportion of Syrian refugees • Economic opportunities: to allow more active (formal and legal) participation of the Syrian refugees in the labor force; systematic and broad-based investment climate reform, including in areas like regulatory reform; and investment promotion. • Economic growth and job creation: through development policies targeting supports simplification of the business environment and the development of exports, the development of credit infrastructure, the introduction of flexibility into the labor market, the reduction of cross‐subsidies in electricity pricing and the development and further expansion of the social assistance system (World Bank 2018c). • Other needs: to support provision of legal aid services, including gender-related cases brought to the Justice Center for Legal Aid regarding alimony, child custody, and domestic violence; support for vulnerable youth through inclusion activities; and reforms to the energy and water sector. How has the World Bank Group • Two ASA engagements deal with issues of regional cooperation, emphasizing movement from a short-term promoted regional-level humanitarian response to a long-term development agenda that balances refugee needs with host solutions? community resilience. • The Mashreq Displacement and Solidarity Program will aim to develop a comprehensive development response to forced displacement and social cohesion in the region through a multisectoral platform to 161 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings inform dialogue and carry out advisory and analytical activities to mainstream the displacement agenda in the regional portfolio; establish a model for collaboration between the World Bank and the UN; identify early recovery and medium-term needs; and strengthen and monitor social cohesion in the region. The ASA is at the concept note stage. • The Refugee-Hosting Communities and Diaspora Mobilization Program seeks to strengthen knowledge and evidence on development solutions to forced displacement, to build consensus both with host countries and communities, and to strengthen the integration of the Middle East and North Africa diaspora as a catalyst for cooperation, development, regional integration, entrepreneurship, and reconstruction of the Middle East and North Africa Region. How has the World Bank Group • Gender appeared in the CAS 2003–05 under the strategic pillars of (i) promoting human development for promoted gender sensitivity? poverty alleviation including gender-responsive policies, strategies, and programs for education, health, and social insurance and assistance; and (ii) promoting gender inclusion in development planning and analysis. • Gender was highlighted in the Systematic Country Diagnostic 2017 as an example of an intervention with significant potential because “factors related to gender underlie a range of issues from poverty to labor market dynamics.” Gender was embedded in the Country Partnership Framework (CPF) 2017–22 as a cross- cutting theme. Projects emphasize gender to varying degrees, but all are gender sensitive or are designed to mainstream gender (and mainstream gender in subprojects, in some cases). At the very least, projects plan to collect data disaggregated by gender. Has the World Bank Group • The vast majority of projects supported both refugees and the host community. Balanced attention to addressed the needs of refugees, refugee and host communities increased over time. This was required by concessional financing. IDPs, and host communities in a • Five of the eight projects approved between FY16–18 received GCFF financing, allowing for borrowing at balanced fashion? concessional rates. • These projects focus on jobs, health, and education, municipal services, economic opportunities, water and energy, and economic growth and job creation. These projects comprise aspects that fall under the government of Jordan’s resiliency promise and approach. The remaining projects are small, yet innovative. 162 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings List and describe the ASA work • Advisory Services and Analytics are a mix of project-specific ASA and economic analyses, poverty analyses, conducted. or political economy analyses. Some produce policy recommendations for promising interventions in the Jordanian context. What has the role of other key • The government of Jordan “provides a three-year vision to ensure that critical humanitarian measures and actors been? medium-term interventions are better integrated, sequenced and complemented.” The Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation created the Jordan Response Platform for the Syria Crisis (JRPSC). JRPSC is the strategic partnership mechanism between the Government of Jordan, donors, UN agencies and NGOs for the development of an integrated refugee, resilience-strengthening, and development response to the impact of the Syria crisis on Jordan and laid out in the Jordan Response Plan (JRP). • UNHCR: UNHCR has also been leading the coordination and providing multisectoral assistance to refugees in Zaatari and Afraq camps, housing 20 percent of Syrian refugees in Jordan. • United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF): To implement both life-saving emergency response and longer- term resilience interventions in Jordan, UNICEF focuses on early childhood development interventions, education, skills, safe camp environments, child protection and psychosocial support, and child-centered safety nets. • WFP: The WFP is providing food assistance to more than 560,000 Syrian refugees, with those living outside of camps receiving electronic vouchers to spend in local shops, contributing to the local economy. WFP is also assisting the government with the National School Feeding Program. • U.K. Department for International Development: With a planned budget of £82 million for 2018–19, the department aims to spend 42 percent of the funding on economic development projects through the Jordan Compact Economic Opportunities Program. • EU: The EU provides $211.9 million through its Regional Trust Fund Response to the Syrian Crisis. The trust fund, channeling EU’s nonhumanitarian aid, primarily addresses longer-term educational, economic, and social needs of Syrian refugees while also helping overstretched host communities and their administrations. • USAID: USAID has supported the Jordanian government with $1.5 billion on macroeconomic stability. USAID has spent $197 million on constructing and renovating key Ministry of Health facilities. 163 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD): EBRD is committed to providing €224.5 million to Jordan through its Municipal Resilience Refugee Response Framework, identifying municipal and environmental infrastructure in the areas of water, wastewater, urban transport, and solid waste as a priority. How (and to what extent) has the • The World Bank’s main counterpart is the government (which is driving the agenda). Projects are funded World Bank Group engaged with through the government’s own systems, leveraging existing capacity and systems while increasing capacity partners (government, of ministries. humanitarian, development) in • The government has a coordinating mechanism for donor financing. The Jordan Response Plan for the Syria addressing forced displaced? Crisis brings together high-level representatives of the government, the donor community, UN agencies, and the International NGO (INGO) community under one planning and coordination framework. Its mission is to ensure an effective, nationally owned and coordinated response to the multifaceted challenges the country faces caused by the Syrian crisis. How has the World Bank Group • The Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results incorporated lessons incorporated lessons learned learned from IFC’s previous activities in special economic zones (SEZs) in Jordan and takes a broader from experience to inform its approach to investment promotion than narrowly targeting SEZs. While the Project Appraisal Document scaling-up of support? incorporates language that suggests SEZs are significant to the project’s investment promotion activities, the Program Action Plan and Disbursement Linked Indicators reflect the project’s focus on capacity building of the Jordan Investment Commission. • The additional financing for the municipal project incorporated lessons learned from the main project. Newer projects incorporate impact evaluations into their design. What has the World Bank Group • Interviewees noted sector knowledge, long-term financing, ability to crowd in resources (as a trusted uniquely brought to this donor), analytics (to mobilize bilaterals), convening power, and concessional financing. No other institution situation? has the global perspective the World Bank has. What was not mentioned was IFC and its ability to work together to mobilize the private sector. What immediate outcomes • World Bank support in Jordan has focused on using the government’s own systems and building related to government were institutional capacity for more sustainable and resilient systems. This is true in health and education. attained? Highlight increased political awareness, government 164 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings commitments with resource • Support to municipalities incorporated institutional capacity building. These were wider project goals. No allocation, improved capacity. indicators for government were planned. What immediate outcomes are • Four projects planned to collect disaggregated monitoring data: the Jordan Emergency Services and Social found in relation to programming Resilience Project, the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results, the for forcibly displaced populations Jordan Emergency Health Project, and the Education Reform Support Program-for-Results. and the vulnerable in host communities (that is, increased programming, balanced attention). Did the World Bank Group • The government is borrowing more—and the World Bank leveraging more—to support Syrian refugees in address needs and challenges Jordan. The Jordan Compact and GCFF seek to ensure balanced support. well? Highlight attention to policy • The sectors the World Bank supports were strained by the influx of refugees. In education, the government constraints, capacity constraints, estimates that 13 percent of students (Jordanian and Syrian refugees) might be in overcrowded classrooms financing constraints? or were crowded out of classrooms altogether. The World Bank is also addressing long-standing, structural issues (water, investment climate), and neglected sectors (health). • More attention is needed to address the demand-side barriers that prevent refugees from obtaining work permits and formalizing labor and refugee parents from sending their children to school. • Improving the investment climate, work permits, and investment promotion activi ties are relevant. IFC’s extensive experience with special economic zones influenced the Program of Action in the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results. Have intermediate or longer-term • It is too early to tell whether intermediate or longer-term outcomes or impact have been attained. outcomes or impact been • In terms of economic opportunity and economic growth, the latest Implementation Status and Results attained? Which outcomes would Report for the Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results indicates likely be promoted (social that the Jordan Investment Commission actively facilitated 75 investments (as of May 2018) but also reveal cohesion, economic growth, fiscal slow progress on the number of work permits issued to Syrian refugees and the number of Syrian home- stability, security)? based businesses formalized. The project reports about 65,000 work permits issued (as of September 2018). 165 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings Government restrictions impede the formalization of Syrian-owned home-based businesses by requiring a Jordanian partner. To date, no Syrian home-based businesses have been formalized (World Bank 2018b). Table E.6. Kenya Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Kenya has both IDPs and refugees. It hosts 500,000 refugees from Somalia (58.2 percent), South Sudan forced displacement in the (22.9 percent), Democratic Republic of Congo (7.3 percent), and Ethiopia (5.7 percent). Almost half of country refugees reside in Daadab (49 percent), 38 percent in Kakuma, and 13 percent in urban areas, mainly Nairobi. • Kenya has had repeated instances of internal displacement triggered by political, ethnic, and land-related violence. Without official, comprehensive, up-to-date national data on IDPs, the most recent estimates show that at the end of 2013, there were about 412,000 IDPs displaced because of ethnic and political violence and land disputes since the 1990s. These figures do not include those displaced by natural disasters, development projects, and pastoralist IDPs. They also do not include any of the estimated 300,000 people who fled postelection violence in 2007–08 and who are usually described as integrated IDPs, which are IDPs who found shelter with host communities or in rented accommodations in urban and peri-urban areas (IDMC 2015). • Kenya has not ratified the Kampala convention for IDPs, and there is a need to guarantee and implement a comprehensive framework on internal displacement. • Refugee management is under the federal government, but with the rapid and ambitious devolution process, governors are expected to have an increasing voice. • In general, the government implements a strict encampment policy, particularly after terrorist attacks in late 2013. There are many de facto constraints to obtaining work permits. • Refugees are heterogeneous in terms of assets and education, with Somalis less educated than those from other countries. 166 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings • In 2013, a Tripartite Agreement was signed in November 2013 between Kenya, Somalia, and UNHCR, with the first group of refugees voluntarily repatriating in December 2014. • Although the anecdotal evidence points to a tension between host and refugee communities, the reality in the field is often more nuanced; nevertheless, refugee presence is increasing environmental degradation and is a drain on land and water resources. What has the World Bank Group’s • There was no reference to the forcibly displaced or host communities in the 2004 CAS. Similarly, in the understanding of the needs or 2010–14 CPS, refugees and IDPs are mentioned in passing. and the 2014–18 CPS does not mention either constraints of forcibly displaced IDPs or refugees. populations and host • The Horn of Africa report recognizes that “A differentiated approach is required to address the communities been? humanitarian and developmental needs of the displaced, based on the years of displacement and relative vulnerability of individual households/families” (UNHCR and World Bank 2015, 28). The study highlights protection needs of the displaced and women, in particular noting that “Constrained or lack of access to basic services, resources, and livelihoods constitute a considerable challenge to the socioeconomic resilience of displaced populations. Refugees and IDPs also confront threats to their physical and psychosocial well-being, both external to and within protection sites, including risk of and exposure to gender-based violence. Displaced women and children, who are a majority in many areas, are among the most vulnerable.” • “Yes” in My Backyard? The Economics of Refugees and Their Social Dynamics in Kakuma, Kenya shows that the overall economic and social impact of refugees in Kakuma is positive in overall Turkana County (Sanghi, Onder, and Vemuru 2016). The refugee presence boosts Turkana’s overall income, income per local person, and domestic employment. It increases consumption, self-reported income, and to a smaller extent, asset ownership in Turkana. There is significant heterogeneity in the impact of the refugee presence on host community incomes and consumption. Households with access to small businesses and farm incomes appear to be buffered better from short-term shocks, but wage-earner and animal-selling households suffer more from them. Farming households and wage earners have higher long-term asset growth in Kakuma than in other towns. • Social impact analysis of refugees on Turkana hosts shows: (i) the refugee presence seems to benefit Turkana women more than Turkana men because the women provide labor (housework, and fetching water and food) and goods (charcoal, firewood, and agricultural crops such as sorghum) to the refugees in return 167 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings for both food and cash, enabling them to feed their children and families, and (ii) the presence of refugees is highly correlated with greater physical well-being of the host community, measured by body mass index and sum of skinfold. Additionally, the analysis suggests that the host community of Kakuma has better nutritional access and status than those in other areas of Turkana County. What financing has the World • The 2017 DRDIP II ($100 million) seeks to enhance the investment in underserved host areas and Bank Group provided? Describe communities to strengthen the government institutions and systems for delivering basic services with an any programming shifts that are area-based and community-driven development approach. Coverage is low—the project targets only five evident. subcounties in these three counties. • Through its Northern Economic Development Initiative, the World Bank will invest $1 billion in Kenya’s infrastructure in northern areas in energy, water, and infrastructure. This represents a recent shift in the World Bank’s thinking because it focuses increasingly on this area due to its underdevelopment. For example, the $300 million Water and Sanitation Development Project (2017) aims to improve water supply and sanitation services in select coastal and northeastern regions in Kenya and will also benefit the residents of Wajir town and people living in communities surrounding Dadaab camp. Apart from supply of higher- quality water and more regular services, both Wajir town residents and Dadaab host communities will benefit from improved sanitation services. With this financing, what has • Within DRDIP II, support focused on: been done? • Livelihoods: improve productivity of traditional and nontraditional livelihoods and capacity building of community-based organizations for livelihoods. • Capacity development: enhance the capacity of national and country authorities in community-driven planning processes, local development management, service delivery capacities, and enhancement and mainstreaming of project interventions with government’s development planning and budget processes. • Environmental management: supporting measures on improved energy efficiency in cooking and lighting and increasing the use of renewable energy sources, reducing pressure on biomass; and soil and water conservation measures. Labor-intensive public works offers employment for the host communities in exchange for undertaking environmental and natural resource restorative measures. 168 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings • IFC is working with UNHCR to encourage private sector investment in Kakuma to benefit both refugees and the host community. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank supports IGAD (through a $3 million IDA grant) toward the establishment of a Regional promoted regional-level Secretariat on Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration within the context of the DRDIP in the Horn of solutions? Africa. The secretariat is generating knowledge and convening governments in the region. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank discussed gender in its analysis of forced displacement and in its operations: promoted gender sensitivity? • The World Bank–UNHCR joint Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa notes that “Gender-based violence is a pervasive challenge across the Horn of Africa, particularly in those countries affected by pervasive conflict” and “Conditions of conflict and insecurity—manifested in varying forms of physical, sexual, psychosocial, and economic abuse— often exacerbate the incidence of [gender-based violence]” (UNHCR and World Bank 2015, 38). • Similarly, the social impact analysis of refugees on Turkana hosts has an entire chapter dedicated to gender- differentiated norms, dynamics, and constraints at Kakuma, analyzing gendered vulnerability and structural violence among Turkana men and women of Kakuma in depth. • DRDIP II project documents state that women and female-headed households and youth, and groups disproportionately affected by displacement will be a specific focus in the project. The appraisal document states that women will be beneficiaries of the labor-intensive public works activities but does not discuss typical measures that need to be considered to mitigate women’s care responsibilities to enhance their participation. • DRDIP II aims to address the drivers of GBV through “communication strategy, including awareness generation at all levels of implementation using multiple and diverse communication channels” as well as “focus on increasing awareness around available services for GBV survivors, and challenge the norms and attitudes that contribute to the acceptability of GBV.” Has the World Bank Group • All World Bank projects in Kenya were directly targeted toward host communities in, Garissa, Turkana, and addressed the needs of refugees, Wajir. Because Kenya will be eligible to receive additional resources from IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window, the IDPs, and host communities in a priority areas identified during the mission in mid-February were the financial inclusion of refugees and balanced fashion? integrated service delivery between host community and refugee schools. 169 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Describe the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank has carried out social impact analysis of refugees on Turkana hosts and has evaluated their Advisory Services and Analytic economic impact on Turkana County. work. • The Horn of Africa study, undertaken in the context of the World Bank’s regional approach to the Horn of Africa, sought to analyze the forced displacement and development nexus, assess the impacts of refugees and migrants on hosting areas and communities, identify ongoing innovative interventions, and propose entry points and practical steps to address the development dimensions of forced displacement and mixed migration in the Horn of Africa. • The joint UNHCR-IFC Kakuma refugee camp consumer and market study, Kakuma as a Marketplace: A Consumer and Market Study of a Refugee Camp and Town in Northwest Kenya, shows that the camp and surrounding town constitutes a significant market with opportunities, despite limitations such as low levels of education and access to formal credit (IFC 2018). What has the role of other key • UNHCR: UNHCR is the key actor carrying out protection and assistance activities to refugees. After a actors been? continuous influx of South Sudanese refugees after renewed conflict broke out in South Sudan in December 2013, the Turkana County government allocated a site near Kalobeyei Township 40 kilometers northwest of Kakuma. UNHCR and the Ministry of Interior and Coordination agreed with the Turkana County government to develop an integrated settlement that would promote the self-reliance of refugees and host communities. In collaboration with the World Bank, UNHCR developed the Kalobeyei Integrated Social and Economic Development Program, a 14-year (2016–30) multiagency collaboration to develop the local economy and service delivery at Kalobeyei. • EU: The EU spends about €100 million per year on development cooperation that directly benefits Kenya, mainly funded from the European Development Fund. The current cycle of 2014–20 amounts to €435 million. It focuses on the hard backbone of economic development: sustainable infrastructure, transport, and energy. It helps the country to gain more food security and become more resilient to climate shocks, especially in the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands, and it works on increasing the accountability of public institutions, with the aim of assisting the process of devolving responsibilities to the counties—in line with the constitution of 2010. The EU also committed €15 million to the Support to the Kalobeyei Integrated Social and Economic Development Program. 170 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings • DFID: DFID committed £14 million to the Arid Lands Support Program to support the coping strategies for more than 500,000 of the poorest people in Northern Kenya (Mandera, Marsabit, Turkana, and Wajir counties) to help them to adapt to climate change and improve their livelihoods. • USAID/WFP: Since 2015, the UN WFP, in partnership with USAID’s Office of Food for Peace, has been supporting food-insecure communities around the Dadaab and Kakuma refugee camps by providing cash or in exchange for work improving community infrastructure, such as rehabilitating local roads or irrigation systems. WFP has recently handed over food distribution to local communities’ authorities. How (and to what extent) has the • Among the humanitarian partners, the World Bank has primarily engaged with UNHCR by authoring several World Bank Group engaged with joint analytical reports and convening a roundtable on the integration of host and refugee economies. The partners (government, World Bank and UNHCR are joining forces for the implementation of the 14-year (2016–30) Kalobeyei humanitarian, development) in Integrated Social and Economic Development Program, a multiagency collaboration to develop the local addressing forced displaced? economy and service delivery at Kalobeyei. • The World Bank has been engaged with the government on its operational response, which focused on host communities affected by refugees. • After the joint UNHCR-IFC Kakuma refugee camp consumer and market study, Kakuma as a Marketplace: A Consumer and Market Study of a Refugee Camp and Town in Northwest Kenya, IFC plans to share the main findings with private sector and social entrepreneurs in Kenya. • IFC has also joined forces with the Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund, a private fund supporting catalytic investments in Africa, to provide funding and support market-creating activities in Kakuma. IFC and the fund are currently seeking $20 million in grant funding from the EU, Germany, and the Netherlands to support investment in Kakuma. How has the World Bank Group • In its only development response to forced displacement in Kenya so far, the World Bank seems to adapt incorporated lessons learned primarily the lessons learned from its wide community-driven development experience rather than any from experience to inform its previous experience specific to displacement issues. scaling-up of support? What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank’s rigorous analytics brings in new evidence that can assist the policy dialogue and expand uniquely brought to this the policy space. A recent good example is “Yes” in My Backyard? The Economics of Refugees and Their Social situation? Dynamics in Kakuma, Kenya, showing the overall beneficial presence of refugees on host communities 171 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings (Sanghi, Onder, and Vemuru 2016). IFC’s potential to bring in the private sector to Kakuma (as a next step after its market assessment, IFC aims to raise awareness and interest across key sectors such as telecommunications, mobile money, health and education, housing, and power) is also unique. What immediate outcomes • The DRDIP II project, while aiming to enhance capacity building at the national and local levels, did not related to government were target any specific outcomes related to any changes in the government. attained? Highlight increased political awareness, government commitments with resource allocation, improved capacity What immediate outcomes are • Given that the project is addressing only host communities, no immediate outcomes are found in relation to found in relation to programming the refugees. The project does not measure outcomes for the most vulnerable in host communities. for forcibly displaced populations and the vulnerable in host communities (increased programming, balanced attention)? Did the World Bank Group • DRDIP II measures only outputs related to community-driven development and does not aim to measure address needs and challenges any changes in the economic or social well-being of host communities. Additionally, although the World well? Highlight attention to policy Bank is addressing some constraints of the host community, the most vulnerable beneficiaries are not constraints, capacity constraints, addressed, judging from the selection of subcounties. financing constraints? Have intermediate or longer-term • It is too early to tell whether intermediate or longer-term outcomes or impact have been attained. The outcomes or impact been DRDIP II project aims to enhance social cohesion and economic integration between host and refugee attained? Which outcomes would communities, but there are no activities in the project to attain these aspects or indicators to measure them. likely be promoted (social cohesion, economic growth, fiscal stability, security)? 172 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.7. Lebanon Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Lebanon has been dealing with displacement issues since 1948, but the government never had a clear forced displacement in the policy in place. The experience with Palestinian refugees helped shape the country’s current policy toward country Syrian refugees. • The large Syrian presence in Lebanon is a source of political contention for at least two reasons: (i) the potential to impact the balance of power in the country, and (ii) political groups are divided in their support toward Syrian refugees. • Several factors have affected World Bank Group support to refugees and host communities in Lebanon. The political economy in Lebanon is an important contributing factor. The per capita ratio of refugees to Lebanese population is high; in some host communities the refugee population is larger than the Lebanese population. Refugees’ demographic distribution and concentration in marginalized areas, lack of clear government policies regarding refugees, insufficient financial support to deal with their influx, government’s reluctance to borrow for refugees, fiscal constraints, an overstretched country office and lack of locally based staff (up until 2017) are all contributing factors. What has the World Bank Group’s • Host communities and refugee needs, and constraints include increased demand for health services and understanding of the needs or hospital care; education services; water supply, sanitation, and solid waste management systems; and constraints of forcibly displaced electricity; increased wear and tear of the road and transport network; high vulnerability and poverty; and populations and host unemployment. communities been? • Primarily, refugees’ needs and constraints include reliance on food vouchers and other assistance for livelihoods; lower incomes than their host community counterparts; work in lower-skilled occupations than their previous employment in Syria; livelihoods of refugee and most vulnerable members of host communities are similar (nonagricultural casual labor); refugees typically work longer hours and for lower wages than host community members; refugees spend more to meet their basic needs than they take in; overall debt loads among Syrian refugees are high; the refugee population is young, thus they have specific needs, particularly for schooling and health care; lack of employment opportunities (consequent erosion in skills and employability); and refugees are often constrained to pursue informal employment or work in the informal economy because of labor market restrictions. 173 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings What financing has the World • The World Bank used a variety of available funding sources to leverage additional funding and a set of Bank Group provided? Describe multilateral aid instruments. Four emergency projects (Education, Health, Municipal Services, and the any programming shifts that are National Poverty Targeting Program) were financed by the Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund; the other evident. education project in the portfolio is financed from an exceptional IDA credit of $100 million and the Lebanon Syrian Crisis Trust Fund. The Roads and Employment Project, Health Resilience Project, Greater Beirut Public Transportation Project, and the Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program are IBRD, GCFF-funded projects. With this financing, what has • In education, an emergency operation supports the operational needs of Lebanese public schools, aiming to been done? improve the learning environment in response to the continued influx of Syrian refugee children. The project provides financing for school operating costs, school rehabilitation, and textbooks. Through a more recent operation, the World Bank, along with other partners, is supporting the second phase of the government program Reaching All Children with Education aiming at providing equitable access to quality education services to Lebanese and refugee children. • In health, an emergency operation aims to help the government of Lebanon restore access to essential health care services for poor Lebanese affected by the influx of Syrian refugees. Through a more recent operation, the World Bank aims to increase access to quality health care services to poor Lebanese and displaced Syrians with the World Bank financing health services for poor Lebanese and UNHCR financing health services for Syrian refugees. • In social protection, the World Bank is supporting the main social safety net program in the country, aiming to reach poor Lebanese through capacity building to improve its targeting mechanism, scale-up of a food voucher program, and a pilot graduation program to improve employability. The World Bank also provided technical assistance to improve jobs for Lebanese and is now helping with the design of the National Jobs Creation Program (a project currently under preparation that aims to benefit both Lebanese and Syrians). Through its most recent GCFF-supported operation, the World Bank is aiming to create short-term employment opportunities for both Lebanese and Syrian refugees (Roads and Employment Project). • On infrastructure and municipal services, the World Bank is supporting municipalities to address urgent community priorities, including solid waste management, water, wastewater and sanitation, roads, recreational facilities, and community activities. The World Bank and IFC are helping the government prepare their $20 billion capital investment plan, which includes energy, water, transport, 174 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings telecommunication, wastewater, and solid waste management projects. IFC is assessing the feasibility of private sector projects. A combination of policy reforms and a public-private investment law (passed in 2017) is expected to make Lebanon more attractive for private investment. The World Bank, through the recently approved Roads and Employment project, supports the first phase of a road program, and is preparing a bus rapid transit project. Both projects are included in the capital investment plan and are expected to benefit poor Lebanese and Syrian refugees. • IFC’s portfolio focused on the financial sector (including microfinance) to increase access to finance for micro, small, and medium enterprises—including for Syrian refugees—and to create jobs in the infrastructure and manufacturing sectors. IFC has also been engaged in advisory activities to improve Lebanon’s investment climate. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group has mostly followed a country-specific approach in response to the crisis (except promoted regional-level when offering the GCFF). There are now plans to develop a regional strategy covering Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, solutions? and Syria. How has the World Bank Group • The CPF refers to specific ways of incorporating gender into the program to reduce differentials between promoted gender sensitivity? women and men in employment, asset ownership, entrepreneurship, and voice, but there is no specific reference to the situation facing women refugees. Analytical work produced by the World Bank does not pay attention to gender-specific vulnerabilities associated with the Syrian crisis. • However, projects are targeting women. The Creating Economic Opportunities in Support of the Lebanon National Jobs Program (FY18) focuses on increasing job opportunities for women and youth. IFC projects included increasing access to formal financing channels for women-led firms. The NPTP graduation pilot, added with the project’s additional financing, is targeting women, and it is expected that working-age females in recipient households will benefit from the technical, soft-skills, and financial literacy training offered by the pilot. • Gender-disaggregated data are being included in World Bank projects’ monitoring and evaluation frameworks, especially when women are one of the target groups, but not all indicators are being reported. Has the World Bank Group • Overall, the portfolio originally focused more on the needs of host communities. There is a sense that poor addressed the needs of refugees, Lebanese need to be compensated. Balanced support to host communities and refugees is increasing, especially with GCFF supporting countries pushing for more refugee-specific targeting. 175 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings IDPs, and host communities in a balanced fashion? List and describe the ASA work • 2013 Economic and Social Impact Assessment: The report discussed the impact of the crisis on health, conducted. education and infrastructure sectors of host communities (water and sanitation, solid waste management and municipal, electricity, and transport). • 2016 Social Context Analysis of Forced Displacement across Syria’s Borders (impact on livelihoods and social cohesion): The report does a stocktaking of the existing literature on social cohesion and livelihoods and the indicators used to measure them. It found that the literature mostly focused on livelihoods and is often collected from the perspective of refugees only. The report calls for more consistent, systematic, and comparable data to be collected across affected countries, and an overarching framework to guide such exercises. • 2016 The Welfare of Syrian Refugees: Evidence from Jordan and Lebanon : Produced jointly with UNHCR on the profile, welfare, and vulnerability of Syrian refugees. What has the role of other key • UNHCR initially led the response, coordinating the humanitarian aid and issuing humanitarian appeals in six actors been? consecutive regional response plans (the first one in 2012). Working groups by sector are trying to coordinate support. Development partners, including the World Bank, are not active participants in these working groups. The private sector seems to be absent from this coordination process. • In 2012 an interministerial committee was formed to manage the refugee crisis. In February 2014, the Lebanese government established a crisis cell, a task force to supervise crisis management and deal with the Syrian refugees and gave responsibility for the coordination of the humanitarian response to the Minister of Social Affairs. Each line ministry has a role in coordinating in its own sector. The health and education ministries seem to have the stronger leadership roles. • The refugee crisis has attracted more donors to Lebanon; the EU is the leading donor. Most donor development money goes through GCFF. The UN has been tracking (quarterly) the amount of funding that Lebanon has received. Foreign assistance to Lebanon remains focused primarily on financing the short-term humanitarian response. How (and to what extent) has the • Multiple coordination forums exist, but they do not seem to have worked effectively, at least until very World Bank Group engaged with recently. There were many issues operationalizing partnerships and collaboration with partners. Several 176 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings partners (government, donors said that they were not aware of what the World Bank was doing or planning to do, or they humanitarian, development) in complained that it took the World Bank seven years to start cooperating and is only doing it now because addressing forced displaced? of its role supporting the Lebanese government in preparing for the Conférence économique pour le développement, par les réformes et avec les entreprises in Paris (2018). • Most donors and partners interviewed in the field said that the UN and the World Bank seemed to have taken coordination and collaboration more seriously only recently. The World Bank and the UN signed a formal agreement in March 2018 establishing concrete areas of collaboration. • Even in areas that seem relatively well coordinated by the government, such as education where all donors support one government program, IEG found limited coordination between the World Bank and partners with some evidence of recent change. Most of the people interviewed mentioned the lack of coordination between the World Bank and UNICEF, the two main players in this area, with recent, promising signs of change. • There is a strong sense among partners and bilateral donors that although the World Bank is willing to work with partners, collaboration has to happen on the World Bank’s own terms. How has the World Bank Group • n.a. incorporated lessons learned from experience to inform its scaling-up of support? What has the World Bank Group • The concessional facility and the grants through the MDTF paved the way for the World Bank to support uniquely brought to this Lebanon. The World Bank was instrumental in establishing both the Lebanon Syria Crisis Trust Fund and the situation? GCFF. Recently more attention has been given to attracting the private sector. • The World Bank adds value by bringing in a more long-term perspective to the support donors are willing to give to Lebanon, but it did little to push the government to address persistent governance issues that need to be tackled for the private sector to engage and for donors to keep supporting the country. The World Bank could have contributed by doing (and sharing) sector-level political economy analyses. • The World Bank showed limited openness to working with partners and to come up with a shared understanding of issues and priorities and how to address them. There seems to be the willingness to change this now. 177 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings • Although the World Bank is widely recognized for its technical expertise and analytical work, the World Bank did very little analytical work and supported little data collection; there is a lot of inertia in the operations approved in Lebanon (no evidence of working differently because of the crisis). What immediate outcomes • Improved capacity. The World Bank provided technical assistance to the Ministry of Social Affairs through related to government were the National Poverty Targeting Program (NPTP) to improve the targeting method used to identify potential attained? Highlight increased beneficiaries of social protection programs. This led to a recertification process of poor and vulnerable political awareness, government Lebanese households that, according to World Bank documents, is being used by other donors, agencies, commitments with resource and ministries. allocation, improved capacity What immediate outcomes are • Through the GCFF, more balanced attention to the needs of both refugees and host communities is planned found in relation to programming through World Bank projects. Before the GCFF, most projects benefited host communities only. for forcibly displaced populations • Increased access to health services and education for poor Lebanese and displaced Syrians were planned and the vulnerable in host outcomes in World Bank interventions. Access to basic municipal services for both poor Lebanese and communities (increased displaced Syrians were also planned outcomes in the Municipal Development Project and in the most recent programming, balanced Roads and Employment Project. Safety net support for poor Lebanese has also increased thanks to the attention)? World Bank through the NPTP program (food vouchers and recertification process). • The Lebanese government is much more actively involved in leading the coordination of development and humanitarian actors. Similarly, government is making advances on more progressive refugee policies. Did the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group tried to address the financial constraints of the government first by creating an address needs and challenges MDTF and, most recently, through the concessional financing. It also helped the government articulate its well? Highlight attention to policy needs better through analytical work. constraints, capacity constraints, • The World Bank tried to find a balance between government priorities and requests and what donors were financing constraints? asking the government to do. According to World Bank colleagues, the political economy surrounding the refugee crisis in Lebanon is very sensitive. The government manages the dialogue with the donor community. • Support focused on vulnerable host communities, responding to the widely held perception that Syrians were benefiting disproportionally, regardless of their actual levels of poverty and vulnerability. There has been an evolution in World Bank support. Most recent World Bank support is more balanced. 178 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Have intermediate or longer-term • Increased access to health services and education for poor Lebanese and displaced Syrians were planned outcomes or impact been outcomes in World Bank interventions. Based on existing project documentation, access to health services attained? Which outcomes would increased for poor Lebanese, and access to education increased for both poor Lebanese and Syrian likely be promoted (social refugees. cohesion, economic growth, fiscal • Access to basic municipal services for both poor Lebanese and displaced Syrians were planned outcomes in stability, security)? the Municipal Development Project and in the recently approved Roads and Employment Project. Available project monitoring and evaluation data suggest that access to services has improved. • Safety net support for poor Lebanese has also increased thanks to the World Bank through the NPTP program (food vouchers and recertification process). • More recently, planned outcomes focus has shifted toward addressing the country’s socioeconomic challenges through promoting economic growth and employment opportunities for both Lebanese and Syrians. It is too early to report results on this because the projects have only recently been approved. Further, most projects receiving concessional financing are not effective yet. 179 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.8. Somalia Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Somalia generates the third largest number of refugees in the world. More than 976,000 Somali refugees forced displacement in the live in neighboring countries, with the majority residing in Ethiopia, Kenya, and the Republic of Yemen. country Refugee returns to Somalia have been increasing. In 2016, 7,276 Somali refugees have returned from Kenya, with the vast majority settling in urban areas. These gains are offset by the numbers still being forced to flee daily; although 32,000 refugees were supported to return to Somalia in 2015, 13,700 new refugees fled from Somalia and arrived in neighboring countries the same year. • More than 1.1 million people are internally displaced, of which 568,000 are new displacements since January 2015. When asked the reason for their original displacement, IDP households in Mogadishu cite conflict and fighting (74 percent), natural disaster (49 percent), and economics and livelihoods (19 percent) as the main reasons. • Four factors can be singled out as key drivers of displacement: (i) conflict and violence stemming from continued intraclan and interclan hostilities; (ii) land acquisition—forcible appropriation of land remains an impediment to return; (iii) environmental factors—Somali pastoralists have used seasonal migration as a coping mechanism for centuries, but with climatic changes and erratic weather patterns affecting agriculture and livestock and causing disease outbreaks, pastoralists’ means of livelihood are destroyed, forcing some to move to urban areas where they settle in IDP settlements; and (iv) food insecurity—land degradation resulting from prolonged droughts leads to heavy losses in livestock, reduced rainfall and water sources, and increased displacement of both farmers and pastoralists. • Housing, land, and property issues are prominent as a consequence of sizable returnee, IDP, and host community populations. Lack of access to affordable and secure housing and land tenure has led to evictions and driven IDPs to the margins of urban areas. There are no current legal and legislative processes, and IDPs are not considered in urban development policy and planning. Mogadishu hosts the largest number of IDPs at 369,000, 46 percent of which have moved multiple times before arriving at their current residence. Thirty-one percent of IDPs in Mogadishu have faced eviction in the past six months, and 37 percent fear eviction in the next six months. 180 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings • The planning process for return and local integration is challenged by the de facto three-state system (Jubaland, Puntland, and Somaliland) of Somalia. Although the government of Somalia officially plans for all three administrations, its authority is unrecognized in Somaliland and is still disputed in the semiautonomous administration of Puntland. In Somaliland, IDPs from South-Central and Puntland are registered as refugees, limiting their opportunity to settle more permanently in Somaliland. The lack of joint planning, coordination, and communication across the three administrations complicates the facilitation of sustainable return processes. • Pressure to close Dadaab Camp in Kenya increases the risk of refoulment and nonvoluntary repatriation of Somali refugees. What has the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank completed an analysis of forced displacement in Somalia in 2014. The study focuses on understanding of the needs or IDPs in Somalia (reflecting the government’s main concern) and highlights the difficulty in distinguishing constraints of forcibly displaced protracted IDPs from other poor and vulnerable members of the society, noting that the overlap in their populations and host needs and challenges indicates that the IDP situation should be addressed through integrated development communities been? initiatives (World Bank 2014). A separate chapter identifies specific needs of IDPs in regard to (i) urban settlements, (ii) livelihoods, (iii) security and human rights abuses, (iv) rule of law, and (v) women and female-headed households. High and rising numbers of IDPs in urban settings may lead to the rise of more permanent slums, with limited access to basic services such as clean water, education, or health, as well as inadequate access to food. This situation will arise in the context of an overall increase in the number of urban poor, including destitute pastoralists, economic migrants, and people who are unable to make ends meet because of a lack of livelihood opportunities. What financing has the World • Somalia has an outstanding $5.3 billion debt to international financial institutions such as the African Bank Group provided? Describe Development Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank. Hence, the World Bank does any programming shifts that are not provide IDA funds, but only finances through the multidonor trust fund. The current Somalia portfolio is evident. supported by two trust funds: the Somalia Multi-Partner Fund (a $320 million multidonor trust fund) and the State and Peacebuilding Fund, which has contributed $36 million to Somalia since 2012. The World Bank Group activities are clustered around two priorities: strengthening core economic institutions and expanding economic opportunity. Although the World Bank became more engaged in identifying forced 181 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings displacement needs after the 2012 famine in the country, there has been no evident programming shift in its lending operations apart from deeper analytical work. With this financing, what has • The World Bank’s current lending portfolio shows that it is mainly engaged in building the capacity of the been done? government and building basic infrastructure versus focusing on human development aspects or supporting conditional cash transfers/social safety nets or livelihoods. According to interviews with World Bank staff, the World Bank’s program in Somalia is conceived as a multisectoral response for area-based development. • Through its Multi-Partner Fund, the World Bank has made progress in engaging key government institutions to enhance their role in revenue collection and service delivery. The Troika projects —namely the Recurrent Cost and Reform Financing Program, the Public Financial Management Reform Project, and the Public Sector Capacity Injection Project—focus on core government functions and support the Somali authorities to deliver services and enhance stability and growth in the country. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank has not promoted regional-level solutions. promoted regional-level solutions? How has the World Bank Group • According to the World Bank’s analysis of displacement, displacement is a gendered process—women and promoted gender sensitivity? children make up an estimated 70 to 80 percent of IDPs. Forty-eight percent of IDPs are female, and women head 47 percent of displaced families. 600,000 of these are women of reproductive age, and 80 percent have no access to safe maternal delivery. Many women are confronted with violence both inside and outside of conflict zones. • Gender-based violence (GBV) remains one of the most prominent protection risks faced mostly by IDP girls, adolescents, and women because of more limited clan protection, frequent absence of male relatives, and lack of secure conditions in settlement camps. Several agencies report that female IDPs account for most reported cases of sexual violence in Somalia. • Despite acute gender-related challenges, a full-fledged gender assessment has not been done yet, though the Interim Strategy Note FY14–16 mentioned that the World Bank will be undertaking a social and gender 182 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings analysis to identify and investigate factors underpinning and influencing gender dynamics across multiple sectors, using the Learning on Gender and Conflict in Africa Trust Fund. • The World Bank has a pipeline project on GBV issues: Inclusive Community Resilience and Gender-Based Violence (P157591) will engage with the International Rescue Committee. Has the World Bank Group • There are no operations directed to IDPs or addressing or mitigating the impact of displacement or any addressed the needs of refugees, operations targeting host communities or returnees. IDPs, and host communities in a • An expert believed the approach of geographic vulnerability in urban planning and services was appropriate balanced fashion? but warned of the need to understand the local political economy because some actions (such as building new infrastructure) could result in more evictions for IDPs because of rising land prices. Describe the World Bank Group’s • Analysis of Displacement in Somalia focuses on IDPs and explores the drivers of forced displacement and Advisory Services and Analytic their interlinks, the scale of displacement, the prospect for returns of the displaced, their vulnerabilities and work. development needs, and political economy challenges concerning displacement (World Bank 2014). • The World Bank partnered with Somali authorities, the EU, and the UN to develop a Drought Impact and Needs Assessment and subsequent Resilience and Recovery Framework, identifying root causes of recurrent drought and its cost, and developing a strategy for medium-term recovery and long-term resilience. Because drought is one of the primary drivers of internal displacement, the Drought Impact and Needs Assessment makes an important analytical and policy contribution to the IDP debate. What has the role of other key • EU: The EU is the largest donor both in terms of political engagement as well as financial and technical actors been? support and expertise. Since 2008, the EU has provided more than €1.2 billion to the country through various financial sources. The cycle of 2014–20 amounts to €286 million and focuses on three sectors: state building and peace building, food security and resilience, and education. • UNHCR provides protection and assistance to refugees, asylum seekers, IDPs, and returnees from Kenya, the Republic of Yemen, and other host countries. In 2017, UNHCR provided 27.7 million in cash assistance to 83,000 people. • Japan International Cooperation Agency: Japan International Cooperation Agency contributed more than $500,000 to launch a pilot project in Somalia IDPs in Mogadishu. In response to the Horn of Africa’s worst 183 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings drought in 60 years, the project is providing clean, safe drinking water to vulnerable IDPs in South-Central Somalia. Japan is also the largest donor to UNICEF’s gender-based violence program in Somalia. In April 2018, Japan donated a $3 million grant to Somalia to keep drought-affected children in school, healthy, and protected. • Building Resilient Communities in Somalia (NGO consortium): Five international NGOs with long experience in Somalia (Concern Worldwide, Cooperazione e Sviluppo, the International Rescue Committee, the Norwegian Refugee Council, and Save the Children International) formed a consortium to address local communities’ long-term exposure to recurrent disasters and destitution. The consortium received financial support from DFID to target 30,100 households directly (about 210,700 people). In 2016, the EU provided the consortium with a grant for an additional three years. From this additional funding, 40 new communities were incorporated into the program, and 12 of the initial communities had their resilience activities scaled up. • International Organization for Migration (IOM): To reduce the negative impact of irregular migration and facilitate transition of IDPs and refugees toward durable solutions, IOM is providing services and support for migrants and mobile populations, with special focus on women, youth, and host communities. Different projects, such as raising awareness on safe migration and providing sustainable alternative livelihoods and employment opportunities, are implemented for this purpose in all three zones: Puntland, Somaliland, and South-Central Somalia. How (and to what extent) has the • The World Bank’s work in Somalia is supported by the Somalia Multi-Partner Fund. The fund is supported World Bank Group engaged with by Denmark, the EU, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United partners (government, States, and the World Bank SPF. humanitarian, development) in • The Somalia Drought Impacts Needs Assessment was led by the federal government of Somalia and Federal addressing forced displaced? Member States, with technical and financial support of the EU, the United Nations (UN), and the World Bank. • The World Bank Group participates in the working groups of the Somalia Development and Reconstruction Facility, but the extent of its participation needs to be clarified. Six joint programs supporting peace- building and state-building goals of the Somali New Deal compact would be implemented through the 184 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings facility. Denmark, the EU, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (DFID) have pledged more than $106 million over three years to these programs. • IGAD organized a Consensus-Building Preparatory Workshop for peace building and the implementation of the different ceasefire and peace agreements signed between Puntland and Galmudug Administrations over Galkacyo disputes. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank’s support to the government of Somalia in general and in the issues of forced displacement incorporated lessons learned is relatively new and has not been expanded. The World Bank is currently focused on enhancing the from experience to inform its governance capacity of the government and building basic infrastructure. scaling-up of support? What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank’s unique value-added is manifest through its rich technical analytical work, for example, uniquely brought to this Analysis of Displacement in Somalia and the joint Somalia Drought Impact and Needs Assessment, that has situation? given better clarity and understanding to the concept of forced displacement in Somalia and increased awareness regarding the needs, constraints, and vulnerabilities facing the IDP, returnee, and host population. What immediate outcomes • According to the World Bank staff, the World Bank’s firm commitment to support the capacity building of related to government were the government has led to the growing awareness and recognition among the development partners that attained? Highlight increased the government is leading. political awareness, government • The government of Somalia integrated IDPs (and return of refugees) into its National Development Plan in commitments with resource 2016. The World Bank–supported Somalia High-Frequency Survey was used as an information base for allocation, improved capacity formulating the National Development Plan policies. What immediate outcomes are • There are no existing projects for the forcibly displaced populations and the vulnerable in host found in relation to programming communities. for forcibly displaced populations • The immediate outcomes tracked in the existing portfolio of projects are outputs related to construction, and the vulnerable in host rehabilitation of roads, installation of water pumps, and so on. Data are not disaggregated in any way. communities (increased programming, balanced attention)? 185 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Subject Case Study Findings Did the World Bank Group • Through the ongoing lending operations, the World Bank is broadly supporting longer-term outcomes— address needs and challenges such as state legitimacy, government effectiveness, improving local governance, and supporting economic well? Highlight attention to policy recovery—without focus on particularly vulnerable groups of the population. There has been no support for constraints, capacity constraints, building livelihood options in a country highly dependent on imports and in need of economic financing constraints? diversification, where livelihoods are one of the primary forced displacement drivers. The focus on gender and GBV has been inadequate. Hence, except for deeper analytical work, the World Bank has not addressed the needs and challenges of the forcibly displaced adequately. There are objective and evident reasons, such as dependence on the MDTF because of the country’s arrears status, lack of coordina tion among donors, and persistent insecurity precluding field missions, yet the fact remains that at the moment the World Bank’s support does not realistically address the specific vulnerabilities of the forcibly displaced and their host communities. Have intermediate or longer-term • The operations implemented by the World Bank are focused on strengthening core economic institutions outcomes or impact been and expanding economic opportunity. Outcomes such as social cohesion and security do not constitute the attained? Which outcomes would end goal of the World Bank’s lending, despite the importance of these two factors for the cessation of likely be promoted (social internal conflict in Somalia. cohesion, economic growth, fiscal stability, security)? 186 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.9. Sudan and South Sudan Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Since 2011, when South Sudan gained independence, the two have faced ongoing violence while hosting forced displacement in the refugees and IDPs. There are now an estimated 2 million IDPs of about 7.5 million in need of assistance country (6 million—half the population—faces severe food insecurity) (IDMC). • In addition to high levels of ongoing violence, South Sudanese host communities also suffer from acute poverty, not unlike the refugees they host. There are tensions between refugees, IDPs, and hosts, and increased tensions and crime in urban and rural areas. • Sudan (in the north) also hosts refugees from Eritrea, Ethiopia, the Republic of Yemen, Somalia, Sudan (returnees), and Syria. Like South Sudan, it, too, has poor institutional capacity. What has the World Bank Group’s • Most factors negatively affect World Bank support for refugees, IDPs, returnees, and host communities. understanding of the needs or These include corruption, lack of capacity on the part of governments in both Sudan and South Sudan, and constraints of forcibly displaced a lack of knowledge, data, and understanding to respond to displacement on a large scale. populations and host • Sudan is a signatory to CSR51 and other international agreements; South Sudan is signatory only to the communities been? Organisation of African Unity Convention. Policies in South Sudan do not account for positive contributions that displaced populations can make in the long term. Hosts and displaced alike lack access to basic food, services, and development; borders and land rights are critical, as well as social protection needs. • Population growth and urbanization are also affected by mass-scale displacement. The economy lacks stability, and documents and interviewees focus on the strains that IDPs put on the local economy. • At the regional level, the EU-Horn of Africa Migration Route Initiative (Khartoum Process) focuses on fighting trafficking and smuggling; national initiatives have sought to incorporate some needs of IDPs. The Transitional Solutions Initiative provided a framework for transitioning from displacement situations to durable solutions. • There is a proliferation of NGOs working with displaced groups, but with the levels of conflict and violence still high, it is challenging for the World Bank to be involved in all areas of concern. What financing has the World • The World Bank has administered the multidonor trust fund since April 2005. It also supports a number of Bank Group provided? Describe projects, including the Social Protection and Safety Nets Project ($21 million from the World Bank to the 187 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings any programming shifts that are government of South Sudan since 2014; DRDIP; SLDP; focus on reducing vulnerability and building evident. resilience); a community-driven development project, which focuses on livelihoods; $3.08 million State and Peacebuilding Fund approved to implement a pilot for Sustainable Livelihoods for Displaced and Vulnerable Communities in Eastern Sudan from 2013–16; and part of the Transitional Solutions Initiative. The Urban Livelihood Project ($35 million) works on labor market programs in urban areas; Local Governance and Service Delivery Project, provides block grants; Agricultural Project. Funds also went to return reintegration ($100,000) in Gezira State; Umbrella Health Programme for Health Sector Development; Rapid Impact Emergency Project for education (Multi-Donor Education Rehabilitation Project, $25.5 million); Sudan Emergency Transport and Infrastructure Development Project; and infrastructure, local governance, and peace-building projects that relate to IDPs, as well. With this financing, what has • Livelihoods, self-reliance, durable solutions, infrastructure, peace building, local governance support, been done? reconstruction, water, education, and health—virtually all types of projects have been considered and/or supported in Sudan and South Sudan to further develop conflict-stricken and postconflict areas. Programming is becoming more holistic (for example, see Country Engagement Note 2017). How has the World Bank Group • 2014 Regional Initiative Support of the Horn of Africa with technical support from the Global Program on promoted regional-level Forced Displacement; GRSS New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, especially local governance and solutions? service delivery project; Framework for Sustained Peace, Development and Poverty Eradication; TSI; Solutions Strategy for the Protracted Refugee Situation in Sudan (2007). How has the World Bank Group • Provides analyses: Female IDPs are particularly vulnerable—they are poorer and more reliant on subsistence promoted gender sensitivity? agriculture for survival than male-headed households, making them the least food secure. Furthermore, social norms and practices often hamper women’s access to finance, inputs, and land. Given the UN estimate that 80 percent of the IDPs are women and children, with few to no assets or livelihood options, female-headed households are therefore most likely to slide into deeper poverty as the crisis continues. • The World Bank Grant for Adolescent Girls Initiative (13–21 years), implemented through the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, commenced in 2010. It is an investment of $500,000 for capacity building in livelihood skills to accelerate women’s participation in the labor market. Has the World Bank Group • n.a. addressed the needs of refugees, 188 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings IDPs, and host communities in a balanced fashion? List and describe the ASA work • In addition to gender analysis and diagnostics, the 2017 Country Engagement Note provides analysis on conducted. self-reliance, livelihoods, and durable solutions as concepts and protracted situations; Land Governance Assessment 2014; Joint UNHCR study Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa; also, Assessment of Development Needs of Refugees and IDPs in Eastern Sudan. What has the role of other key • UNHCR is a key actor, and takes a cluster approach with various other NGOs (for example, food, security, actors been? and livelihoods coordinated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN [FAO], WFP, and Mercy Corps). The EU, the Norwegian Refugee Council, and UNDP have been in active in skills training and livelihoods, especially with youth. Key donor states include the Arab Republic of Egypt, Canada, Denmark, EC, Finland, Gash River Group (led by the Dutch Embassy, the World Bank Group participates), Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. How (and to what extent) has the • Some ad hoc partnerships (for example food and nutrition through UNICEF); limited projects including World Bank Group engaged with livelihoods, peace building, and so on. The most valuable contributions have come from joint analyses (for partners (government, example, with UNHCR). humanitarian, development) in addressing forced displaced? How has the World Bank Group • Attempts to work more holistically (though it is not clear this has actually happened) and less piecemeal. incorporated lessons learned Similar attempts to address gender issues resulted in more discussion, and no clear results (indicators, from experience to inform its measures, integration into new projects, and so on), and greater discussion of livelihoods since 2005, scaling-up of support? including for the displaced. Perhaps some acknowledgment of criticism of self-reliance initiatives, also the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, for example, calling multidonor trust fund disbursements a failure. What has the World Bank Group • Analytical skill (for example, concepts of self-reliance and livelihoods); new connections for funding; uniquely brought to this strength in data collection, improvements in statistics available; development projects already under way situation? that have already been serving the displaced and are poised to more fully take into account their needs in relation to hosts. 189 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings What immediate outcomes • n.a. related to government were attained? Highlight increased political awareness, government commitments with resource allocation, improved capacity What immediate outcomes are • Still largely focused on hosts; still tension between holistic versus need to address separately as its own found in relation to programming vulnerable group. Lacking clear outcomes from the programs under way (as relate to forcibly displaced, that for forcibly displaced populations is), though simply having more mention of IDPs in programming is a start. and the vulnerable in host communities (increased programming, balanced attention)? Did the World Bank Group • The World Bank did not address the key constraints of the displaced—neither refugee nor IDP key address needs and challenges constraints were address. well? Highlight attention to policy constraints, capacity constraints, financing constraints? Have intermediate or longer-term • n.a. outcomes or impact been attained? Which outcomes would likely be promoted (social cohesion, economic growth, fiscal stability, security)? 190 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.10. Turkey Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Turkey is the largest recipient of refugees in the world, with more than 3.7 million registered refugees, forced displacement in the mainly Syrians (3.4 million) and only 230,000 in the 21 camps. From the onset of the Syrian crisis, the country government of Turkey chose to take full charge of the camps (setup and management) and the registration process—a heavy financial and institutional burden. The government of Turkey followed an open-door policy of temporary protection, welcoming the refugees in rural and urban communities and offering free public health and education. • The government has not borrowed for refugees. In 2016, when refugees started fleeing toward Europe, the EU offered a €3 billion assistance package to Turkey. The assistance package is managed by the EU under the name Facility for Refugees in Turkey (FRiT). Projects are administered by international financial institutions, humanitarian organizations, and INGOs. What has the World Bank Group’s • The latest World Bank strategy makes no direct reference to refugees. Turkey is a large borrower, so there understanding of the needs or was room for ASA pertinent to refugees as the issue started becoming more visible in 2014. The Country constraints of forcibly displaced Partnership Strategy progress report mentions that unanticipated risks arising from the large influx of populations and host refugees were effectively incorporated into the World Bank’s program. communities been? • The 2017 CPF recognizes the refugee issue as creating pressures on services and the labor market and the indirect effect of the crisis on the east and southeastern provinces’ tourism and investment. ASA identified the impact of the Syrians under Temporary Protection (SuTP) to local communities, SuTPs’ location and living conditions, and employment opportunities and challenges. What financing has the World • Because the government of Turkey had no interest in borrowing on IBRD terms to support refugees, the Bank Group provided? Describe World Bank did not provide any financing. The World Bank does, however, administer a number of grants any programming shifts that are for the EU FRiT after successfully submitting relevant project proposals. evident. • The awarded projects were: (i) education infrastructure for building and equipping new schools in provinces with a high concentration of refugees (€150 million); (ii) socioeconomic support for improving employability of refugees and host communities through, among other things, language training, skills training, on-the- 191 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings job training, and cash for work (€50 million); and (iii) a parallel activity for supporting the creation of entrepreneurship and employment opportunities for refugees and host communities (€5 million). With this financing, what has • The education infrastructure project started in 2017 and is supporting school infrastructure and will enhance been done? the quality of the learning environment, as well as the project management and technical capacity building for infrastructure. The Construction and Real Estate Department of the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) will construct about 56 formal and informal education facilities, reaching more than 40,000 direct beneficiaries. It will focus primarily on Turkey’s southeastern and southern provinces, where most school - age SuTP reside, and where Turkey currently hosts the highest concentration of out-of-school SuTP. • The Employment Support for Syrians Under Temporary Protection and Turkish Citizens Project was approved in FY18. The project will finance (i) employment services and active labor market programs, following processes that are already in place by the Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR) under the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MoLSS), that is, skills training, and cash for work; (ii) skills assessment and profiling methodology tailored to SuTPs; (iii) language and skills training; (iv) institutional support for ISKUR (counseling and job assistance, information dissemination, monitoring employment services, and so on), and (v) institutional support for MoLSS (work permit application systems and monitoring and evaluation systems). • The World Bank will also be administering, under a separate project, an additional €5 million, which includes some activities supporting employment opportunities for SuTP and Turkish citizens residing in selected localities in the cities that are most affected by the Syrian refugee crisis. This is currently under discussion with the Turkish government. How has the World Bank Group • The World Bank did not promote regional-level solutions. promoted regional-level solutions? How has the World Bank Group • The education infrastructure project is targeting 50 percent female direct beneficiaries and the employment promoted gender sensitivity? support project 60 percent SuTP youth beneficiaries and 30 percent SuTP female beneficiaries. Has the World Bank Group • All World Bank–administered projects target host communities and SuTP equally (50 percent-50 percent). addressed the needs of refugees, 192 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings IDPs, and host communities in a balanced fashion? List and describe the ASA work • The World Bank conducted analytical work on the following: conducted. • Assessed the socioeconomic impact of SuTPs in host communities and found that the mass influx of refugees is a strong supply shock to the informal labor market. As such, local labor force was shifting from the informal labor market to upgraded work opportunities. Moreover, the influx is boosting consumption and therefore economic activity. • Assessed Turkey’s response to the crisis and found that off-camp SuTPs are more likely to become economically self-reliant and contribute to their host country. The study recommends a healthy incorporation of SuTPs into communities that will protect the well-being of host communities while satisfying the humanitarian necessity of helping Syrians in a more effective and efficient manner. • Mapped the location and living conditions of SuTPs and found that they are concentrated mainly in Gaziantep, Hatay, Istanbul, and Sanliurfa, but with nonhomogeneous deprivation patterns. Deprivation and lack of adequate living conditions of SuTPs are more severe in areas where access to education, employment, and income are an issue, and are less acute in areas where access to health and housing is lagging behind. • Assessed SuTP employment opportunities and challenges and found that SuTPs can become employers or employees. SuTP employees are successful if they are willing to take the most undesirable jobs, and SuTPs can become can become microentrepreneurs if they have access to funds, speak Turkish, are educated, and have relevant experience. • Recently assessed the impact of SuTPs on firm entry and found that hosting refugees was overall favorable to firms because they did not seem to crowd out existing firm entry, but instead they crowd in new foreign-owned firms. What has the role of other key • The Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD) was the overall main body of actors been? coordination until the Law on Foreigners and International Protection institutionalized the Directorate General of Migration Management (DGMM), which is only currently taking over AFAD’s operations. DGMM was established in spring 2013 but took over only recently. The government of Turkey is strong and keeps the refugee issue under its wing between the two organizations and the line ministries. The Ministry of 193 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings National Education (MoNE) (directorate of migration and emergency education) runs programs to integrate Syrian students and teachers into its education system; Ministry of Health (MoH) contributes its own resources to make health services available to SuTPs, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MoLSS) runs programs to strengthen the work permits system and collects data on job creation, accreditation and licensing, collects data and disseminates information; the Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR) under MoLSS is running the work permits program and the active labor market program and focuses on making the SuTPs self-reliant; the Ministry of Family and Social Policies participates in the implementation of the Emergency Social Safety Net and runs community-based protection initiatives to ensure that persons with special needs have access to specialized protection services and psychosocial support, including for children and women at risk. The EU, after the deal with Turkey in 2016, is the major contributor (by far) after the government for SuTP response. The EU contracted projects under the €3 billion FRiT to deliver efficient and complementary support to Syrian and other refugees and host communities in close cooperation with Turkish authorities. Under the nonhumanitarian assistance, FRiT cooperates with Agence Française de Développement, DAAD, EBRD, European Investment Bank, German Agency for International Cooperation, ILO, IOM, WHO, and the World Bank, as well as with DGMM and MoNE. • UNHCR is the most significant humanitarian agency and co-leads the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan with UNDP. WFP is helping refugees through cash transfers that are spent in local businesses and administers the largest humanitarian program in European history for FRiT (€384 million). UNICEF is focusing on integrated child protection, education, youth engagement, and livelihood programs for Syrian refugees and vulnerable host community children and youth. IOM is a recent addition to the UN family, but an important participant in refugee and migrant management in Turkey. The ILO has been at the forefront of the response, focusing on livelihoods support. UNDP promotes a resilience-based development approach, complementing the humanitarian response by developing the Syria Crisis Response and Resilience Program. Bilateral organizations such as DFID, the German Agency for International Cooperation, Japan International Cooperation Agency, and KfW are all participating. How (and to what extent) has the • The World Bank engaged in various ways with many of the international and local actors. With UNHCR, the World Bank Group engaged with World Bank organized a workshop on social cohesion; with UNDP, the World Bank works on labor market partners (government, integration with refugees for ISKUR; with UNICEF, the World Bank cooperates on integration of migrants and refugees into the education system; with FAO, the World Bank drafted a proposal submitted to FRiT for 194 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings humanitarian, development) in enhancing the resilience of Syrian refugees and host communities in the agrifood sector (the proposal did addressing forced displaced? not go through); with the Association for Solidarity with Asylum Seekers and Migrants, the World Bank undertook a study on the qualitative assessment of Syrians’ employment and livelihood opportunities and challenges in Turkey and for women’s opportunities for social entrepreneurship; with WFP, the World Bank cooperates on evaluating its cash transfer program; under FRiT, the World Bank administers the two EU- funded projects (education infrastructure and employment). • The World Bank has a series of formal interactions with the government. With MoNE, the World Bank works with the lifelong learning division on youth, migration management unit for insertion of refugees into the education system, and construction; with ISKUR, the World Bank works on labor market integration; with MoLSS, the World Bank works on strengthening the work permits system and is starting a project to support seasonal work for SuTPs; with DGMM, the World Bank has worked on national-level household data collection and implementation of a harmonization strategy, and currently on the design for a one-stop- shop project for reception centers; with MoFSS, the World Bank is currently designing a project for a case management system for referral services targeting families at their households, and with the social assistance division on the cash transfer program (integration of the existing system to the government system). With MoH, the World Bank was unable to engage because a lending operation has not been an option. The World Bank worked with MoD on the national representative survey on labor markets. How has the World Bank Group • n.a. incorporated lessons learned from experience to inform its scaling-up of support? What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank has brought analytical work that no other partner could provide. uniquely brought to this situation? What immediate outcomes • There is a series of results emanating directly or indirectly from World Bank interventions: (i) the regulation related to government were on work permits for Syrians who are under temporary protection—passed in January 2016, this law was attained? Highlight increased passed directly after a relevant workshop that the World Bank organized for the government of Turkey; (ii) political awareness, government after the World Bank completed the survey that mapped the location and living conditions of SuTPs, the government initiated the placement of SuTP children in schools; (iii) the qualitative exercise that the World 195 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings commitments with resource Bank undertook for AFAD was the basis for the design of the employment project awarded by FRiT to the allocation, improved capacity World Bank; and (iv) after interactions with the World Bank, ISKUR realized legal, technological, and functional gaps. What immediate outcomes are • There are specific indicators monitoring all World Bank activities under FRiT. The indicators will monitor the found in relation to programming effects on SuTP, host communities, female beneficiaries, and youth. for forcibly displaced populations and the vulnerable in host communities (increased programming, balanced attention)? Did the World Bank Group • n.a. address needs and challenges well? Highlight attention to policy constraints, capacity constraints, financing constraints? Have intermediate or longer-term • The current World Bank portfolio aims at improving social integration by providing equal opportunities to outcomes or impact been SuTPs and Turkish citizens. The employment support project will additionally enhance economic growth attained? Which outcomes would given that the integration of the large number of SuTPs in the formal labor market is expected to promote likely be promoted? development. 196 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings Table E.11. Uganda Case Study Matrix Subject Case Study Findings Context and background of • Uganda has historically received refugees from neighboring states and, during certain periods (most forced displacement in the notably the early 2000s), it has also had to manage internal displacement due to conflict within Uganda country itself. At other times, Ugandans have moved to neighboring countries because of internal conflict. Forced displacement, whether IDPs or refugees, has affected various regions, but has tended to concentrate in northern Uganda (traditionally the poorest region). • Civil war and insurgency ravaged northern districts from 1986 until a negotiated peace settled in 2006. The last phase of conflict lasted more than a decade and was characterized by widely publicized atrocities (LRA) with intense government counterinsurgency (UPDF). Civilian populations were caught between the LRA and UPDF and displaced into camps. Uganda has been largely free from significant internal conflict since 2006 and the broad resolution of the situation for IDPs who moved back their villages, but conflict in neighboring states (particularly Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and South Sudan) has continued and resulted in ongoing flows of refugees over time. What has the World Bank Group’s • The World Bank’s overarching focus in relation to northern Uganda (where IDPs and refugees have tended understanding of the needs or to concentrate) has been on the significant disparities evident between that region, other regions, and constraints of forcibly displaced national averages (for example, lack of economic diversification, concentration of poverty, and so on). As populations and host part of that focus, IDPs were recognized as a target group (among others) for the World Bank–supported communities been? Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF) series, with particular reference to them returning to their villages postconflict. • More recently and before the major influx of refugees, the World Bank began its engagement with the Office of the Prime Minister and UNHCR in developing and underpinning the Refugee and Host Population Empowerment (ReHoPE) strategy and has also launched the DRDIP project aimed at host communities and refugees. What financing has the World • NUSAF was supported by a $100 million IDA credit; NUSAF II was supported by a $100 million IDA credit Bank Group provided? Describe and a $35.21 MDTF grant; NUSAF III is supported by a $130 million IDA credit. DRDIP (Uganda) is supported any programming shifts that are by a $50 million IDA credit noting restructuring is in train. Over time, the World Bank has conducted various evident. studies relating to northern Uganda, including studies that were germane to the internal conflict and its 197 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings consequences. As the internal conflict drew to a close, the World Bank conducted a study on Land Poverty and Social Impact Analysis for northern Uganda (2007) and a PER for northern Uganda (2007). • The World Bank also availed of trust funds such as the Northern Uganda Peace, Recovery, and Development Fund ($1.6 million), and Trust Fund to support the Ugandan Emergency Development and Reintegration Fund ($2.85 million), which was supplemented by World Bank support of $240,000. With this financing, what has • Before the current period and the initiation of DRDIP with its regional focus on forced displacement, the been done? major World Bank Group interventions regarding forced displacement were NUSAF and NUSAF II. • NUSAF and NUSAF II supported, in part, the return of IDPs from camps in which they resided over the course of conflict in the region. The development objectives and components of the various iterations of NUSAF are broadly similar, noting the evolution in language and intent, particularly under NUSAF III (ongoing), which places an emphasis on resilience and (under the fourth component) moving toward more systemic and longer-term support for the development of social safety nets. NUSAF focused on disadvantage, marginalization, and poverty in northern Uganda with reference to diverse target groups, for example, elderly people, women, children, people with disabilities, and IDPs. • Outside of NUSAF, perhaps the most important support in laying the groundwork for current efforts was that provided in developing the capacity of local government through Poverty Reduction Support Credits, a local government development program and its successor, LGDPII (2003–07). These efforts sought to improve the local government institutional performance for sustainable, decentralized service delivery. DRDIP is a more recent and more specifically dedicated response to forced displacement with an added regional dimension. • Ongoing ASA includes the following: Refugee and Host Community Survey—in collaboration with UBOS and the Office of the Prime Minister; Rapid Diagnostic Assessment of Land and Natural Resources Degradation in Areas Impacted by South Sudan Refugee Influx in Kenya and Uganda—in collaboration with FAO, the Ministry of Water and Environment, UNDP, and UNHCR. How has the World Bank Group • The DRDIP (P152822) has a regional dimension (Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Uganda) reflective of a strong World promoted regional-level Bank Group pedigree in regionwide support over time through, for example, support for the HIV/AIDS Great solutions? Lakes Initiative (FY05), the East Africa Trade and Transport Project (FY06), and the Regional Communications Infrastructure Project (FY15). 198 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings How has the World Bank Group • The general incidence of gender-based violence is pronounced within Ugandan society and is particularly promoted gender sensitivity? acute in refugee settlements, noting that more than 80 percent of the recent influx of refugees from South Sudan is women and children. World Bank Group documentation shows awareness of the challenges at both the CPF and project levels. Gender issues have been incorporated at the PDO level and as part of the indicator’s matrixes of projects. Understanding of the gender-specific constraints and need has been improved through detailed research on the part of the World Bank. Has the World Bank Group • The NUSAF series focused on Northern Uganda (NUSAF III extending east) and IDPs (returnees) as one of addressed the needs of refugees, many target groups. In that instance, IDPs were first confined to camps and therefore segregated and, on IDPs, and host communities in a returning to their village, they were, as such, their own hosts. DRDIP is largely focused on host communities balanced fashion? with reach into refugee communities. That said, under the strategic frameworks in place (CRRF and ReHoPE), the UN and partners with reach into the host communities will focus on refugees in parallel. List and describe the ASA work • The World Bank has conducted various studies relating to northern Uganda over time, including studies that conducted. were germane to the internal conflict and its consequences—for example, Land Reform (2001), Rural Development (2002), Poverty Assessment (2005), and Conflict Analysis (2005). As the internal conflict drew to a close, the World Bank conducted a study on Land Poverty and Social Impact Analysis for northern Uganda (2007) and a PER for northern Uganda (2007), followed by Uganda Post-Conflict Land Policy and Administration Options: The Case of Northern Uganda (2009). • Recent ASA includes the following: ReHoPE strategic framework—joint work with UNHCR and UN RCO; Assessment of Uganda’s Progressive Approach to Refugee Management—(2016) in collaboration with the Office of the Prime Minister and UNHCR; Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa (2015)—in collaboration with UNHCR; Forced Displacement in the Great Lakes Region: A Development Approach (2015); Mental Health Among Displaced People and Refugees: Making the Case for Action at the World Bank Group (2016); ReHoPE: Stocktake Report (2017). • Ongoing ASA includes: Refugee and Host Community Survey—in collaboration with UBOS and OPM; Rapid Diagnostic Assessment of Land and Natural Resources Degradation in Areas Impacted by South Sudan Refugee Influx in Kenya and Uganda—in collaboration with FAO, the Ministry of Water and Environment, UNDP, and UNHCR. 199 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings What has the role of other key • The CPF notes that there are 30 development partners active in Uganda (down from 40 identified in earlier actors been? strategy documents). Some of the more significant partners —for example, the EU and USAID— work exclusively through implementing agencies that are established in and vetted within their own territories. The Local Development Partner Group is co-chaired by the World Bank Group, DFID, the UN Resident Coordinator, and USAID. The ReHoPE stocktaking identified 695 implementing agencies active across the 11 refugee-hosting districts and notes this may be an underestimate. • The largest donors (not including UN agencies) are DFID, the EU (European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations, and others), USAID, the World Bank Group, and others (including embassies and agencies associated with Germany, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and so on). • The most significant partners for the World Bank Group’s engagement in forced displacement are the Office of the Prime Minister (centrally responsible for all matters relating to forced displacement and refugees, and key government representative in the ReHoPE and DRDIP efforts); and UN agencies (UNDP, UNHCR, and UNICEF). • At this time, the trust fund support provided by the Embassy of Norway to enable the survey of the refugee- hosting districts is of particular value. Major partners on an ongoing basis include African Development Bank, the EU, and USAID. How (and to what extent) has the • The CPF notes that the World Bank has traditionally played a central role in development partner World Bank Group engaged with coordination and harmonization, both as permanent co-chair of the former Joint Budget Support partners (government, Framework (JBSF) and as chair of the Local Development Partners’ Group (LDPG). humanitarian, development) in • The JBSF (which also included the IMF) involved a considerable degree of coordination and harmonization addressing forced displacement? among the 12 budget support partners and helped to elevate the policy reform dialogue with government. In response to the government’s National Partnership Policy (2013), development partners and the government of Uganda reached agreement on a broader framework for partnership dialogue involving all development partners, and this will be a joint platform for high-level dialogue on development effectiveness—that is, the biannual National Partnership Forum, chaired by the Prime Minister and attended by Ministers, Ambassadors, and Heads of Cooperation. • The World Bank’s leadership is widely acknowledged by development partners and government and was reconfirmed by interviewees during the mission. The World Bank led the process that led to this new 200 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings partnership framework and has, as co-chair of the LDPG, continued to actively promote a more result- oriented partnership dialogue owned by government, guided by the NDP, and aligned with the national budget and planning processes. How has the World Bank Group • Over the course of World Bank Group engagement, lessons learned have been built on to include, for incorporated lessons learned example, lessons learned under NUSAF about ensuring active participation of women in interventions, and from experience to inform its the development of local government capacity. More recently, the World Bank Group has supported and scaling-up of support? undertaken work such as the ReHoPE stocktake that has helped clarify partner roles and comparative advantage, and the World Bank is also undertaking a survey of host and refugee communities (Norwegian partnership) to clarify the context for livelihood development under DRDIP. • One of the objectives of An Assessment of Uganda’s Progressive Approach to Refugee Management was to identify lessons from Uganda’s experience to inform the design and implementation of the Settlement Transformative Agenda and the ReHoPE strategy, as well as the policy dialogue in other refugee-hosting countries (World Bank 2016). • The study concludes, among other things, that integration of social services and economic activities will need to be informed by deeper situational analysis in the refugee-hosting districts, which vary with respect to their land tenure systems, cultural and social settings, economic and livelihood opportunities, and infrastructure status (the trust fund survey will feed into this). What has the World Bank Group • The World Bank Group added value is evident in taking a longer-term perspective that seeks to establish uniquely brought to this durable benefit and achieve efficiencies; a principled approach to working through government that serves situation? to build capacity; a knowledge, evidence, and data-driven focus that has led, for example, to the ReHoPE stocktaking and, with the support of the Norwegian partnership, the current survey of refugee receiving districts; a reputation for due diligence that allows others to follow (leadership and convening), as was the case in relation to budget support and, more recently, through ReHoPE and DRDIP; and recognition of the importance of political economy and associated efforts to ensure coverage through the political system. What immediate outcomes • The NUSAF series served (and continues to serve) to enhance capacity of local government. That enhanced related to government were capacity is being used as a base for efforts under DRDIP, and the approach under NUSAF will be rolled out attained? Highlight increased to districts not included under NUSAF, but due to be included under the restructured DRDIP. political awareness, government 201 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings commitments with resource allocation, improved capacity What immediate outcomes are • The NUSAF series assisted in the return of IDPs to their homes through the provision of support for found in relation to programming community development, community infrastructure, and the provision of cash transfers in exchange for for forcibly displaced populations work. The series also contributed to developing capacity of local government. Under NUSAF, for example, and the vulnerable in host 9,339 subprojects were funded, of which almost 29 percent were classified as community development communities (increased initiatives, 57 percent as support to vulnerable groups (including IDPs), 9 percent as community programming, balanced reconciliation and conflict management, and 5 percent as youth opportunities programs. attention)? • IDPs and returnees benefited under NUSAF and NUSAF II. At this stage, it is too early to ascertain immediate outcomes for DRDIP. Did the World Bank Group • The NUSAF series provided an integrated approach. Largely speaking, there was no difference between address needs and challenges returning IDPs and relevant communities because IDPs were of those communities. The support provided well? Highlight attention to policy under NUSAF was designed to re-cement communities, offer income-generating opportunities, and install constraints, capacity constraints, basic infrastructure that enhanced quality of life. There was (is) no robust social safety net system and, as financing constraints? such, the interventions provided necessary support to enable communities to regain a foothold after intense conflict. The NUSAF series also contributed to developing local government capacity, a critical constraint, to improve service delivery. • Finally, NUSAF III is also seeking to lay the foundations for robust and durable social protection and safety nets. DRDIP is working in similar territory, but with an enhanced emphasis on building resilience through an approach that seeks to straddle host and refugee communities. In that sense, the project is addressing a critical constraint to overall development. Have intermediate or longer-term • Outcomes and impacts are not yet evident under DRDIP (which is in initial stages), but because there may outcomes or impact been be a longer-term legacy, it is likely to be under component 5, which seeks to consolidate regional efforts attained? Which outcomes would toward addressing displacement and mixed migration through policy dialogue and engagement, research, likely be promoted (social capacity support, knowledge management, and partnership functions that will then support innovative cohesion, economic growth, fiscal responses to displacement and mixed migration. stability, security)? 202 Appendix E Case Study Matrix Findings References IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2018. Kakuma as a Marketplace: A Consumer and Market Study of a Refugee Camp and Town in Northwest Kenya. Washington, DC: IFC. Sanghi, Apurva, Harun Onder, and Varalakshmi Vemuru. 2016. “Yes” in My Backyard? The Economics of Refugees and Their Social Dynamics in Kakuma, Kenya. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2014. Analysis of Displacement in Somalia. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2015a. Azerbaijan—Systematic Country Diagnostic. Washington DC: World Bank. ———. 2015b. “Iraq—Emergency Operation for Development Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD1485 , World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016. An Assessment of Uganda’s Progressive Approach to Refugee Management . Washington, DC: World Bank Group. ———. 2018a. “Iraq—Emergency Social Stabilization and Resilience Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD2556. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2018b. “Jordan—Economic Opportunities for Jordanians and Syrian Refugees Program-for-Results.” Implementation Status and Results Reports ISR35084, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2018c. “Jordan—First Equitable Growth and Job Creation Programmatic Development Policy Financing.” Project Appraisal Document PAD124998. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. UNHCR and World Bank. 2015a. “Eastern Africa—Forced Displacement and Mixed Migration in the Horn of Africa.” Report ACS14361, UNHCR and World Bank, Geneva and Washington, DC. 203 Appendix F. Landscape of Key Humanitarian and Development Partners Mandate Related to Forced Emergency Response Medium-Term Support Stage in Process Displacement Indicative activities supported United Nations entities and agencies United Nations High Commissioner International protection for refugees Coordination and delivery of Coordination and delivery of for Refugees (UNHCR) and stateless people and to seek international protection and international protection and permanent solutions for them; assistance. assistance. Engage in IDPs situations— coordination and delivery roles. Office for the Coordination of Overall coordination of IDP Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) assistance and coherent interagency response to emergencies and natural disasters. United Nations Children's Fund Long-term survival, protection, and Emergency education, health Education, health (including (UNICEF) development of all children including (including psychosocial), water, psychosocial), WASH, basic IDP and refugees. sanitation, and hygiene (WASH). infrastructure (schools, clinics, access roads). World Food Programme (WFP) Mobilize and manage refugee Emergency food security and Cash transfers, school feeding, feeding operations managed by nutrition. connecting producers to markets; UNHCR. livelihood. United Nations Development Develop inclusive, sustainable and Coordinate relief and rehabilitation Support development of national Programme (UNDP) resilient societies—in low-income efforts. development strategies and policies countries and those emerging from to mainstream displacement issues; conflict. human development; livelihoods. International Organization for Migration, including progressive Emergency livelihoods. Border management; capacity Migration (IOM) resolution of displacement situations development; community building. through resilience approach. 204 Appendix F Landscape of Key Humanitarian and Development Partners Mandate Related to Forced Emergency Response Medium-Term Support Stage in Process Displacement Indicative activities supported International Labour Organization Livelihoods; social integration; (ILO) strengthen national and local capacities. World Health Organization (WHO) Respond and recover from emergencies with public health consequences. Multilateral Development Banks, European Union (EU) EU Food assistance / basic nutrition, Assistance to refugees and Directorate-General for European Civil shelter. Emergency assistance; vulnerable communities. Human Protection and Humanitarian Aid Psychosocial; shelter. rights and civil society, cash Directorate-General for International transfers, education (basic and Cooperation and Development secondary), health, municipal services; water; resilience and livelihoods. European Bank for Reconstruction Displacement outside mandate but Infrastructure; develop private sector and Development (EBRD) initiated Syria Refugee Package in to stimulate jobs; municipal and 2016. environmental infrastructure in the areas of water, waste water, urban transport and solid waste. EIB No mandate in displacement. EU’s Economic Resilience Initiative. Implements policies of the European Commission. FAO Food security, reduce rural poverty Emergency relief. Food security, food production, rural and sustainable use of natural development, livelihoods. resources to address drivers and consequences of migration. 205 Appendix F Landscape of Key Humanitarian and Development Partners Mandate Related to Forced Emergency Response Medium-Term Support Stage in Process Displacement Indicative activities supported African Development Bank Fragility and building resilience. Emergency response. Islamic Development Bank Building resilience. Emergency response. Bilaterals—Department for SIDA: Emergency education, food DFID: Governance; basic services International Development (DFID), and drinking water; shelter; and (health, education; water); Swedish International Development medical assistance. Livelihoods / economic Cooperation Agency (SIDA), Japan USAID: emergency response. opportunities. International Cooperation Agency DFID: emergency response. JICA: Education; health; WASH. (JICA), U.S. Agency for International USAID: Governance, conflict Development (USAID), German resolution, peace and security, health Agency for International Cooperation systems; maternal and child health, (GIZ), German Development Bank HIV/AIDs; food security; (KfW) SIDA: child protection; employment. KfW: livelihoods; GIZ: Technical and vocational education and training, employment, women’s empowerment. International Humanitarian NGOs Norwegian Refugee Council Operational NGO focused exclusively WASH; education; legal; skills on conflict-induced displacement. training and livelihoods, food assistance, shelter. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre for monitoring, reporting on and advocating for IDPs. 206 Appendix F Landscape of Key Humanitarian and Development Partners Mandate Related to Forced Emergency Response Medium-Term Support Stage in Process Displacement Indicative activities supported Danish Refugee Council Providing help and protection to Protection, food security, shelter, refugees, IDPs and returnees. income generation, water and Works to provide not only sanitation, education. humanitarian assistance but also support durable solutions. International Committee of the Red Ensures humanitarian protection and Food, basic shelter, clean water, Cross assistance for victims of armed assists in health care; education; conflict and other situations of works to prevent sexual violence. violence. 207 Appendix G. Closed Projects: Outputs and Outcomes Project Name Country Year Outputs or Outcomes Northern Uganda Social Action Fund Uganda 2003 Access to education and water services improved in Uganda, but less so for health services. The project supported the reintegration of 458 IDPs. Community Rehabilitation and Sierra Leone 2000 The Community Reintegration Rehabilitation project assisted the 221,745 IDPs in Reintegration Project Sierra Leone in returning to their areas of origin, and all IDP camps were closed. Subprojects rehabilitated about 10,000 hectares of land to produce various crops and contributed to increased production of another 1,000,000 hectares of land. Beneficiaries of the agricultural outputs were not specified. Training and employment creation focused on former combatants. Productive Partnerships Support Colombia 2002 The Productive Partnerships Support project in Colombia saw 35 percent of Project partnerships reach an “adequate social partnerships index,” suggesting improvement in social integration. In a sample of 23 partnerships, 70 percent had increased income and a 70 percent increase in days of employment per household (not disaggregated by IDP). The percentage of IDPs as total share of population decreased from 20 percent to 7 percent. Emergency Reconstruction Eritrea 2001 The Emergency Reconstruction project in Eritrea supported the return of 83 percent of IDPs, reducing the number of IDPs in camps to zero. Cultivated land was increased by 103 percent, 8,600 IDPs received agricultural training, and agricultural support was provided to 35,000 war-affected people; 24,670 (primarily) IDP households received cash transfer assistance to reestablish themselves. Structural Adjustment Credit 2 Azerbaijan 2002 The Second Structural Adjustment Credit in Azerbaijan produced a survey on the living conditions of IDPs. Microprojects benefited an estimated 110,000 individuals—the majority (80 percent) IDPs. Mostar Water Supply and Sanitation Bosnia and 2000 The Mostar Water Supply and Sanitation project in Bosnia and Herzegovina Project Herzegovina increased the efficiency of water and energy services and waste collection in refugee-hosting communities. 208 Agriculture Rehabilitation and Burundi 2005 The Burundi Agriculture Rehabilitation and Sustainable Land Management project Sustainable Land Management increased crop yields and returning IDPs net profits by 26 percent. Returning IDPs were reintegrated (43,301) as measured by sowing for two successive seasons and the ability to procure their own tools and seeds. Health Sector Guinea 2005 The Health Sector Project in Guinea reduced deaths among pregnant women by 15,596 and of infants by 14,542 through increased access and use of facilities providing Integrated Management of Childhood Illness and emergency obstetrics. Utilization improvements included assisted delivery (38 percent), diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus DPT3 vaccination (86 percent); and at least one antenatal care visit (249,030 pregnant women). The targeted population was the host community. Emergency Recovery and Ethiopia 2001 The Emergency Recovery and Rehabilitation Project in Ethiopia provided Rehabilitation Project agriculture and income support to 67,105 returning IDP households, totaling $37 million in transfers. A total of 14,097 rural housing units were built for IDPs, and 66,038 returnee households received support. Social and Economic Recovery Croatia 2005 The Social and Economic Recovery Project in Croatia created 1,359 jobs for war- Project affected people. Great Lakes Initiative on HIV/AIDS Africa 2005 The Great Lakes Initiative on HIV/AIDS Support in the Great Lakes region of Africa (GLIA) Support provided an uninterrupted supply of condoms to refugee sites (100 percent was achieved), and both the percentage of young refugees reporting condom use with his or her last nonregular partner increased, and the percentage of women in refugee camps forced to have sex in the last 12 months decreased. Health Care System Improvement Montenegro 2004 The Montenegro Health Care System Improvement project increased access and use of health services among the Roma (the largest IDP population). The percentage of the Roma population reporting use of primary health care increased from 21 percent in 2004 to 82 percent in 2012. National Emergency Employment Afghanistan 2003 The National Emergency Employment Program for Rural Access in Afghanistan Program for Rural Access created 2.7 million unskilled labor-days for host community members; 1,517 209 kilometers of roads were rehabilitated, and 7,033 cross-drainage structures were rehabilitated. North East Housing Reconstruction Sri Lanka 2005 The North East Housing Reconstruction Program in Sri Lanka supported the Program regularization of land titles for 49,507 homeowners, providing returning IDPs with newly constructed housing on their land. Market-Oriented Smallholder Angola 2009 Returning IDPs in Angola achieved increases in agricultural production of Agriculture 66 percent, and 62 percent of farmers adopted improved agricultural technology. These outcomes were likely achieved through farmer training and membership in a farmer collective (100 percent). Juba Rapid Impact Emergency South Sudan 2006 The Juba Rapid Impact Emergency Project in South Sudan provided access to Project pharmaceutical supplies and learning materials, reaching 4 million returnees. Puttalam Housing Project Sri Lanka 2007 The Puttalam Housing Project in Sri Lanka increased access to housing (7,050 units), water (3,754), and sanitation for IDP households (774 IDP households) and prepared 130 settlement plans. Regional HIV/AIDS Partnership Africa 2007 The Regional HIV/AIDS Partnership Program in Africa was not successful in Program achieving voluntary counseling and testing rates, knowledge of HIV transmission channels, or condom use among the refugee, returnee, and IDP populations. The project did achieve its target percentage for sexually transmitted infection services among the forcibly displaced. Regional and Municipal Georgia 2009 Community subprojects in Georgia provided increased access to water, sanitation, Infrastructure roads, and housing in communities targeted for returning IDPs. However, the data do not differentiate between IDP beneficiary and community member beneficiary. Abyei Start-Up Sudan 2009 The Abyei Start-Up project in Sudan did not meet any of its outcome targets for improved access to services. Sri Lanka: Emergency Northern Sri Lanka 2010 The Sri Lanka Emergency Northern Recovery Project achieved its goal, facilitating Recovery Project the return of about 147,000 IDPs, providing 14,796 IDPs agricultural inputs with more than 7,207 hectares of land returned to agricultural production. In total, the 210 project partially achieved its goals in employment with 44,671 IDPs having 50 days employment—about 2.1 million employment days. Horn of Africa Emergency Health and Africa 2012 The Horn of Africa Emergency Health and Nutrition project in Africa treated 85,697 Nutrition children for malnutrition, 209,466 children for acute respiratory infections, and 88,939 children for diarrhea; and 173,541 pregnant women received supplements. In total, 1.6 million refugees received access to health and nutrition services. Emergency Project to Assist Jordan Jordan 2014 The Emergency Project to Assist Jordan to Partially Mitigate the Impact of Syrian to Partially Mitigate the Impact of Conflict in Jordan reached 6.3 million beneficiaries in the host community, Syrian Conflict including 2.5 million safety net beneficiaries; it achieved a 97 percent immunization rate for children; a 0.58 per capita use rate (achieved); and a 1.1 per capita inpatient admission. Emergency Food Crisis Response and Central African 2014 The Emergency Food Crisis Response and Agricultural Relaunch in the Central Agricultural Relaunch Republic African Republic improved food crop production for 147,105 beneficiaries, provided livelihood assistance to 721,635 beneficiaries, and human capital protection to 153,248 children. Source: Independent Evaluation Group. Note: IDP = internally displaced person. 211 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433