Topics and Regions
Land Portal Foundation administrative account
Details
Location
Contributions
Displaying 1521 - 1530 of 6947Provision of Integrated Emergency Support Through Protection, CCCM, and Shelter Interventions in IDP Settlemen
Objectives
The proposed integrated intervention will scale up access to quality CCCM, HLP, CP, GBV, and Shelter/NFIs services in Kaxda and Deynille. NoFYL will implement a multi-cluster intervention around CCCM and HLP. This project will fill existing gaps in ESNFI, CCCM, HLP, GBV, and Child protection support and complement activities undertaken under other ongoing projects. On CCCM NoFYL aims at strengthening coordination structures through training, improving the coordination of service providers, service monitoring and mapping to identify gaps, community-led site maintenance activities to ensure the upkeep of sites, support governance structures to ensure community participation and self-management of sites and information management at a site level, site improvement activities to minimize protection risks and ensure safety in sites and safety audits to identify site risks. Scale-up inter-sector CFMs and conduct site decongestion activities to minimize protection risks at target sites. On HLP, intervention NoFYL will undertake eviction risk assessments and monitoring of threats to evictions by assessing potential eviction sites to inform the response. Provision of case management services, legal counseling around land tenure documentation, provision of post-eviction cash-based response packages, and coordinating referrals to other complementary services. ESNFI intervention will be complemented by Shelter partners by improving the IDPs living conditions through the distribution of emergency NFI kits and emergency shelter kits. Any cases that are identified by NoFYL monitors with Shelter needs will be referred to Shelter partners for support. Child Protection (CP) case management will be spearheaded by SWDC, identified children at risk or traumatized children will be referred for support, an incident of family separation will be reported to SWDC for tracing and reunification purposes. Joint safety walks and mapping will be conducted to identify risks for children. Referrals networks will be strengthened and coordinated for safer and timely responses. NoFYL will implement these activities in sites in Deynille (10) and Kaxda (5). 6,112 households, approximately 36,675 (10,368 men, 14760 women, 5,227, boys, 6320 girls) will benefit from this intervention, as well as the whole community working in these sites including local authorities, clusters, and other organizations. The multi-sectoral approach will be useful to create synergies enabling the concentration of services and expertise within the same location and the same population leading to achieving a greater impact. The four partners (NoFYL, SSWC, and SWDC) will build on each other strengths and better complement each other to ensure community acceptance and success in implementation. The synergy between the 3 sectoral partners will ensure sound management of the program, greater impact, efficiency, and more cost-effective operations. The project target sites include the following Deynille District Sites - Center Midnimo (301HHs), Center Al Cadaala (370HHs), Center Cosob (296HHs), Center Mideeye (453HHs), Center Qanciye (547HHs), Center Hadii La Yaabo Yaasinka (410HHs), Center Iskaashi 2(377HHs), Center Dahraan (450HHs), Center Doco Waalid (513HHs), and Center Dhibane (682HHs) Kaxda District Sites - Center Sanaag (563HHs), Center Miisaan (576HHs), Center Gargaar(376HHs), Center Shaafi (451HHs), and Center Xurmo (434HHs)
Réhabilitation d’infrastructures publiques à travers l’activation à Bel Air d’un Centre de Services à l’Entrep
General
The project aims at supporting existing actions towards the reduction of community- based violence by facilitating the employability of youth through the reinforcement of their capacities and the creation of micro and small enterprises in the construction sector in the target neighbourhoods. The selected areas of intervention are among the most vulnerable of Port-au-Prince and are characterised by high social conflict and economic insecurity which result in urban violence and unstable life conditions. ILO's efforts towards the creation of sustainable and decent jobs through professional training (aimed at obtaining State certification), production and rehabilitation of public infrastructures hope to decrease the risk of community-based violence, in agreement with the mandate of the CVR-MINUSTAH. In particular, ILO's intervention targets the young unemployed and aims to involve them in income-generating activities that will contribute to the economic development of their own neighbourhoods. Direct beneficiaries: 57 direct beneficiaries (30% women) aged between 15 and 35, including 8 entrepreneurs considered as "vulnerable", identified through a community participatory process. Indirect beneficiaries: - Families of the direct beneficiaries; - Residents and entrepreneurs of Fort National; - Old people, disabled people, children and all residents who will benefit from the pedestrian accesses built in their neighbourhood.
Sustainable Forest and Land Management (SFLM)
General
Sustainable Forest and Land Management in the Dry Dipterocarp Forest Ecosystem of Southern Lao PDR
Land Conversion, Social Impacts, and Legal Remedies: Understanding the Role of Community Paralegals in Address
General
This project addresses the ongoing critical development challenge of changes in land use in Indonesia, Burma (Myanmar), and India. It will generate knowledge and an evidence-driven intervention strategy to help people gain more security over the land and natural resources they rely on for their livelihoods and survival. Industrial projects, large-scale agriculture Since the 1990s, successive governments of growing Asian economies have promoted trade and industrial expansion as critical drivers for economic stability and growth. This focus has led to rural and peri-urban landscapes being transformed by industrial projects, infrastructure, and large-scale agriculture. For people who depended on the land, these transformations have resulted in serious social and ecological impacts: -direct physical displacement and dispossession -loss of livelihoods -pollution or land degradation Legal rights remain unprotected There are very few easily accessible remedies to address the impacts of land use change. While regulations to minimize and mitigate damage exist, implementation is poor. There is widespread non-compliance to regulations. Administrative agencies are ineffective at responding to local community needs and integrating them into policy or legal designs. Laws are also ineffective. They serve as a threat, but not something that people can use to exercise their basic rights. Lawyers are costly, and often focused on formal court channels that are impractical for most people The UN Commission on Legal Empowerment estimates that four billion people cannot exercise their legal rights because of costs, dysfunction, corruption, or abuse of power. There is a recognized need for intermediary institutions, such as media, political parties, and unions that help citizens exercise their rights. Community paralegals as a solution Community paralegals also offer an effective solution. They are attracting increasing attention from international organizations, including the UN Commission on Legal Empowerment, for being cost-effective, flexible, and able to manage plural legal systems. They are especially noted for their effectiveness in dealing with land rights disputes in many countries, including several in Africa. This project will map land use changes in Indonesia, Burma, and India. Researchers will study how community paralegals can -collect rigorous data on impacts of land use change -translate impacts into legally actionable evidence -help affected communities seek remedies through formal administrative and legal institutions closest to the point of impact The project team will use conduct locally grounded research that identifies workable solutions to reduce the adverse effects of land use change on communities. The research will advance knowledge, inform evidence-based policy, and build evidence to promote responsible land governance.
Review of Methods for Economic Analysis of Adaptation in the CARIAA Hot Spots
General
Preamble The Collaborative Adaptation Research Initiative in Africa and Asia (CARIAA) was launched in 2012 and is jointly funded by Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and the United Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID). It is managed by IDRC from headquarters in Ottawa and two regional offices, one in Nairobi, Kenya, and one in New Delhi, India, in consultation with DFID's headquarters in the UK. CARIAA's goal is to develop robust evidence to inform how to increase the resilience of the poorest and most vulnerable populations in climate change hot spots in Africa and Asia. Selected hot spots are large deltas, densely populated river basins and semi-arid regions. CARIAA will provide grants for three consortia working of each hot spot. As part of the program development activities, CARIAA aims to gather knowledge facilitating the focusing of research - and its use - on common cross cutting themes of paramount importance for the program. One of these themes is a common approach to economic analysis across consortia and its integration within the larger research work plan of each consortium. Background Several developing countries where conditions of vulnerability to climate change occur have started to plan for adaptation, including through the development of Least Developed Countries National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs), under the United Nations Climate Change Convention. Other countries, even if not formally required to develop NAPAs, are developing national strategies aiming to integrate adaptation actions in their overall development pathway. Many are now entering a second phase with the preparation of the National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). The success in the implementation of such plans on the ground, and the capacity for them to reach and benefit vulnerable communities, critically depend on research being able to produce rigorous evidence for the economic feasibility and opportunity of adaptation interventions, including highlighting the potential profitability of private and public investments in specific cases. In this context, reliable estimates and measures of the economic costs of adaptation require investigation of several sources of evidence. These range from local case studies through to global scale assessments. The body of information on costs of adaptation has increased dramatically in the last ten years, covering the range from specific interventions to global aggregations (IPCC AR4 2007, IPCC AR5 working draft, 2013). In most populated areas such interventions have costs lower than damage costs, even when just considering property losses (Tol, 2002, 2007, Nicholls, 2010) or agricultural yield losses (IUCN 2009, FAO 2010). However, the process leading to choice within the pool of interventions that satisfy the constraint of economic opportunity is not evident. A critical issue is to be able to reconcile and integrate, at the time of selection of a set of viable options, economic analysis with social and gender equity, and with the promotion of environmentally sustainable interventions within the space of possible socio-economic development scenarios across multiple space and time scales. This implies as much as possible the need of a multi stakeholder approach that includes social and gender appreciation of vulnerability. Even then, economic analysis should be one, but not the only criterion in the choice of which adaptation option to implement, in particular in the case of planned adaptation that often needs to be backed by boarder development policies. As adaptation is not a one step process and vulnerability changes with time, economic analysis should also look not only at the costs of adaptation for a certain option or a certain set of options, but at their variation depending on which sequence of steps are taken and within which time span, and at the costs necessary to build the willingness to adapt even when capacity is present. A gathering of examples when these multiple aspects are modulating economic analysis still needs to be undertaken to a great extent. Large scale assessments of projected adaptation costs have been attempted, but they remained mostly at a global (UNFCCC 2007, World Bank Economic Analysis of Climate Change - EACC, 2010, de Bruin et al 2009, Hope 2009, Carraro 2009) or regional level (Africa - UNEP AdaptCost 2007, East Asia - ADB 2009, East Africa - SEI 2009, AfDB 2011), and based on speculative evidence with little information coming from cost benefit analyses of adaptation projects at the local level. The EACC program of the World Bank also included a series of country level assessments In Africa, UNEP launched the AdaptCost program that produced reports on four sectorial approaches (coastal adaptation, agriculture adaptation, water adaptation and ecosystem based adaptation) and support access by African governments to various sources of adaptation finance including the GEF and the new Adaptation Fund. How uncertainty on the figures presented in these studies depend on the methods is evident: for example, the evidence analyzed by AdaptCost revealed a wide range of estimates for the amount of funding necessary for adaptation, with current (2010-2015) financing needs that range from $5-30 billion a year. These needs are likely to rise over time, with studies reporting a range from $20-60 billion a year by the period 2020-2030. Recently, a new effort to systematize a ground data based approach involving the review of a large number of single climate change projects in Asian countries was launched by USAID Asia Pacific and UNDP. During the program, multi-disciplinary technical teams in participating countries will be provided with practical skills in preparing cost-benefit analysis to inform project appraisal and to inform medium and long-term climate investment planning in the agriculture and water sectors. UNDP is also leading the technical advisory process that accompanies least developed countries in submitting adaptation projects to the GEF to implement the national adaptation programs. In a similar spirit of the Asian initiative, UNDP has recently started to offer economic analysis services to ground the countries¿ project proposals not on general projections, but on cost benefit analysis of other projects already present on the ground or in different countries under similar conditions. The initiative is in its pilot phases and in Africa may involve the work of CEEPA (Source: UNDP Africa adaptation cluster office, private communication, 2013). Some examples of economic studies of adaptation in the CARIAA hot spots Specifically on the CARIAA program hot spots (large deltas, large glacier fed river basins and semi-arid zones in South Asia and Africa), the literature is limited outside areas of traditional intervention. For instance, in the case of deltas, most studies focus on the Mekong, the Nile and to a less extent the Indus. Economics aspects of climate change impacts are treated for the Mekong delta at an aggregate level (ICEM 2009, IMWI 2010), mainly with the attention to losses to fisheries and rice/agricultural production. Some impacts, like land and infrastructure loss and flooding due to sea-level rise, excessive rains and drainage congestion in urban settings, have attracted more research than others, like costs of increasing storm variability and changes in ground salinity levels (Nicholls et al., 2010. However the World Bank EACC country studies provide broader assessments for pilot countries at a national level). In the Nile, analyses have been focusing on the cost of impacts, in particular on lost infrastructure due to coastal erosion, and to the costs of sea water infiltration on the agriculture and health sectors (El Raey 2009). Costs for the Nile delta region for an estimate of 50cm sea level rise may imply the loss of 200,000 Jobs and up to 60% of the value of industrial, health, home and agricultural services by 2050 (El Raey 2009, Abdrabo, 2010). An attempt to quantify costs and benefits of specific adaptation actions in selected coastal areas of the delta is currently undertaken by the University of Alexandria through a set of projects funded by IDRC. In Senegal, assessment of the impacts of sea-level rise in coastal areas show that costs of adaptation could amount to at least 5-10% of GDP (Niang-Diop, 2005). However, if no adaptation is undertaken, then the losses due to climate change could be up to 14% GDP (Van Drunen, 2005) in most coastal countries. Similar overviews of the projected costs of climate change impacts have been carried out for the Indus delta, where a wide vulnerability assessment program led by WWF-Pakistan (WWF, 2010) quantifies the decrease of fish catches (30% on average from 1990) as a consequence of decreased freshwater flow into the delta, loss of agricultural yields (15% from 1990 at parity of cultivated land area) and increased loss of property value due to cyclones. The program looked at these aggregate value losses in order to build up an economic case for large scale mangrove restoration. In semi-arid lands and river basins, economic analyses have been focusing primarily on projected decline of agricultural yields due to decrease in water availability. Adaptation options have been looking at the economic feasibility of extending irrigation, using improved grain varieties and managing water for a range of competing uses. Fewer studies are available on the costs and benefits of options like restoration of soil quality, and of the benefits for adaptation of general sustainable development interventions such as better linkage of farmers to markets and resolution of land tenure and land use conflicts. Finally, the choice, timing and level of capacity through which a specific option implemented is critical: In semi-arid agricultural lands different studies have found that the benefits of intuitive adaptations options are often not clearly surpassing the direct costs of interventions, or the long term indirect costs of loss of ecosystem services put under additional stress by the implementation of such options (IPCC AR4, 2007). However, current studies are increasingly aware of this interlinking of factors: In Africa, initial assessments of the mixed social, economic and environmental costs of adaptation in the Berg River Basin (again via IDRC funded research) and the Pangani River Basin (IUCN 2011) show that the costs of not adapting to climate change can be much greater than the costs of including flexible and efficient approaches to adapting to climate change into management options. In South Asia, a growing number of capacity building research looks - among others - at the evaluation of costs and benefits of adaptation and disaster risk reduction strategies in peri-urban areas and large alluvial plains, and at the costs and benefits in adjusting water, energy, agriculture and natural resources management policies in a way that is compatible with countries' goals for sustainable economic growth (see for example project "Building Research Capacity to Understand and Adapt to Climate Change in the Indus Basin" funded by IDRC). Past and present work supported by IDRC In order to critically contribute to this growing body of knowledge, IDRC has been supporting the creation and the consolidation of regional environmental economics research and capacity building networks (including CEEPA and SANDEE , working in the focus regions of the CARIAA program), and more recently facilitated the development of economic and cost benefit analysis components within the vast majority of projects financed via the Climate Change and Water (CCW) program. Support to these projects included the initial participation of environmental economic experts in the African Adaptation Research Centers' inception workshop in 2011; the facilitation of access by research teams to CEEPA resources ; the support to projects testing innovative approaches such as the stakeholder-focused cost benefit analysis pioneers by IIED (IIED Synthesis report 2012); and a study on access to public and private funds on climate financing that may lead to a larger initiative on Mobilizing Private Sector Finance for Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. This last project aims to understand the conditions for rigorous costing of adaptation options to be used to mobilize actual funds, and to provide smart brokering of communication between project implementing partners and investors. Rationale for CARIAA's investment CARIAA has now a big opportunity to advance in this direction, as consortia will be requested to work on a large number of single case studies at the same time, looking not only at single costs and benefits of adaptation, but at an analysis of the conditions that determine: i) the feasibility and the implementation costs of similar options in different countries and hot spot areas; and ii) the differences and commonalities of approach in mobilizing the resources to bear such costs. In doing so, consortia will respect an ecosystem-based vision at the basis of the choice of the hot spots approach. Consortia will produce a methodology in undertaking cost-benefit analysis as well as economic analysis of adaptation options to inform policy decision that can be comparable across geographical areas, so as to allow replication of intervention. As consortia will be the ambassadors of a single program, the development of a common methodology in the work of all consortia is instrumental. Proposed activities and methods In order to achieve the above objectives, the following preliminary activities are envisioned in this research support project: a. The selection of consultants with significant experience on economic analysis methods in the hot spots b. A review of recent economic analyses looking at the costs of impacts of climate change and the costs and benefits of adaptation options in projects and studies going from a local to a hot spot scale; c. A comparison of the research methods used in those analyses, with documented discussions on their appropriateness across different hot spots scales and contexts and their efficacy in informing policy or practice; d. A stakeholder analysis of key institutions working on economics of adaptation in the hot spots; e. A set of options for further program support to the work of consortia. Consultants Either one consultant or a team of consultants with specific experience in South Asia and Africa context will be asked to prepare a review that will be the main output of the above activities. If a team is selected, the consultants will have to work in collaboration, and present a single study to IDRC. The questions to be addressed by the study are listed in the tables in the annex (see Annex tables 1 and 2) but they may undergo revisions in the final version of the ToRs presented to consultants. Use of hot spots reports To ensure coherence of scope, the proposed background study can build on preliminary results of the hot spots climate change impacts reports currently under preparation by a separate pool of consultants under CARIAA research support project 107265. For instance, the systematic review done during the preparation of the hot spots climate change impacts reports includes sources on the economic analysis or economic policy work that will facilitate the focus of the background study. If necessary, the background study team will be encouraged to seek clarifications from the hot spots consultants of project 107265. Structure and contents of the study The background study will contain the following: a. Case studies, institutions and literature analysis in Africa, including new or emerging programs; b. Case studies, institutions and literature analysis in South and Central Asia, including new or emerging programs; c. Comparisons of methodological approaches to economic analysis of adaptation, and their results, with a discussion on differences and commonalities of approach across the two continents and the three hotspots; d. Recommendations on contextualized best approaches/methods; e. Suggestions for the design of the CARIAA support activities to the economic analysis work of consortia. Intended users and uses The primary users of the back
Ghana Landscape Restoration and Small-Scale Mining Project
General
to strengthen integrated natural resource management and increase benefits to communities in targeted savannah and cocoa forest land scapes
Moldova Agriculture Competitiveness Project
General
The Project Development Objective is to enhance the competitiveness of the agro-food sector by supporting the modernization of the food safety management system, facilitating market access for farmers, and mainstreaming agro-environmental and sustainable land management practices.
Joint Programme on Housing, Land and Property Issues - Phase II
General
Overall objective:
To contribute to the creation of an enabling environment where crisis affected women and men and communities can exercise their HLP rights.
Specific Objectives:
- To improve access to HLP documentation, record keeping and tenure security
- To improve access of affected women and men to services and legal remedies
- To improve access to land, housing and natural resources
Human Rights Based Spatial Planning in Cambodia as a Tool for Promotion of Tenure Security for the Most Vulner
General
Overall objective: To contribute to CSOs role as actors in policy dialogue, accountability processes and effective advocacy for improvement of living conditions of vulnerable communities affected by economic infrastructure development in Cambodia. Specific objective: To sustainably strengthen CSOs capacity to participate in and contribute to building and promoting land tenure security and peaceful land dispute resolution mechanisms in urban poor areas under threat of eviction in Phnom Penh.
Sustainable and Integrated landscape management of the Western Area Peninsula
Objectives
To strengthen conditions for the sustainable and integrated management of multiple-use landscapes (piloted in the WAP landscape) to protect globally significant biodiversity, safeguard ecosystem services generating local and national socio-economic benefits, and advance towards land degradation neutrality.
Other
Note: Disbursement data provided is cumulative and covers disbursement made by the project Agency.
Target Groups
Normal 0 false false false en-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Normálna tabulka"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;} The project will generate national and local benefits in the following ways. At the national level, capacities of national MADs (especially, MLHE, MAF, MTCA, EPA, NPAA) for integrated and sustainable land management, forest landscape restoration, PA management, use of ecosystem service evaluations and spatial planning in land use planning and decision-making, incorporation of a gender-sensitive approach will be greatly enhanced. Furthermore, as noted in UNDP’s Country Programme Document for 2020-2023, poverty persists primarily because of four interdependent drivers, one of which is recurrent disasters due to increasing vulnerability to climate change-related stresses. By promoting integrated and sustainable land management in the WAP landscape this project will increase environmental and economic resilience in the WAP landscape through its activities related to protecting mangrove ecosystems, reducing deforestation and land degradation, managing the use of community natural assets and supporting sustainable livelihoods. Findings from the socio-economic assessment undertaken during the PPG revealed that poverty is evident in the surveyed communities and unemployed inhabitants are dependent on the forest resources. Given the nexus between reducing environmental vulnerability, building disaster resilience and poverty eradication, the WAP Master Plan will be produced via a participatory and highly collaborative and gender responsive planning process, wherein all stakeholder groups will participate in negotiating stakes and objectives to be included in the integrated landscape management plan (budgeted under outcome 1). Within the scope of the Master Plan, alternative IGAs will be promoted (ensuring that 50% of beneficiaries are women and 60% are youth) and the viability of different value chains assessed and promoted (e.g., waste-to-wealth, processing of agricultural products, ecotourism). To mitigate the risks of economic displacement, the project has budgeted for an in-depth Environment and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) within the first 6 months of implementation, based on which an Environment and Social Impacts Management Plan (ESMP) will be prepared and implemented, including a resettlement plan and an Indigenous Peoples/Ethnic Minority plan, if deemed necessary. The matter of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) will be explored during the ESIA and the approach applied if deemed appropriate. Local communities will participate in reforestation of degraded mangroves with indigenous trees and clearing invasive species if present. These tasks will utilize payments for public works to provide cash transfers as payment for carrying out these public works. Part of the benefits for the communities may include harvesting of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) from mangrove forests, under sustainable use plans (e.g. through oyster, sea cucumber or seaweed cultivation). The project will provide training on improved harvesting techniques, processing, packaging and marketing, to those engaged in NTFP value chain (in conjunction with Output 2.4). The possibility of carbon sales from the community PA will also be explored, building on the experiences generated by the Gola Rainforest National Park carbon credit scheme. These national and local benefits will help maintain support for the continued implementation and enforcement of the WAP Master Plan in turn resulting in global environmental benefits. The combined impacts of all the project outcomes are expected to deliver the following local benefits: Increased yields of at least three crops by at least 50% through sustainable land management activities, agroforestry, and through associated reductions in land degradation. About 10% of the population of WAP (4,427 people) benefitting, in equal numbers of men and women. Income generating activities will increase household incomes and create employment, particularly also for targeted youth. The project will advance business skills and support access to vocational training. This will address the mismatch between the skills supply and the labour market demand by providing targeted training on business for young people. Connecting households to improved energy initiatives will reduce the amount of firewood required to cook and heat households. This is likely to reduce the labour required to procure firewood with dividends to women who often bear the responsibility of procuring firewood. Increased employment opportunities, household incomes and productivity of three crops will contribute to reducing food insecurity. Equal number of women and men will benefit (guided by the gender action plan). Reduction in soil erosion through better land management and reforestation, with consequent reduced siltation of water systems and associated reductions in water treatment and hydroelectricity production costs, and reduced vulnerability to disastrous floods. Diversified, resilient and improved livelihoods through income generating activities, with attendant reductions in climate vulnerability of households that have access to additional incomes. Economic value stemming from the protection of valuable biodiversity as well as soil and biomass sequestration of carbon, both of which contribute to the preservation of global public goods. Economic value from increasing the knowledge base on ILM, watershed services and forest-friendly land rehabilitation approaches that can be integrated into the GoSL’s national land management strategy.