11

THE GLOBAL MOMENTUM TOWARDS STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE: IS THE MENA REGION FALLING BEHIND?

Published by the Lebanese Red Cross and the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, American University of Beirut.

This report can be obtained from the Lebanese Red Cross and the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs office at the American University of Beirut or can be downloaded from the following website: www.aub.edu.lb/ifi.

The views expressed in this document are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the views of the Lebanese Red Cross and the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs or the American University of Beirut.

Beirut, April 2018 © All Rights Reserved

THE GLOBAL MOMENTUM TOWARDS STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE: IS THE MENA REGION FALLING BEHIND?

Author: Chris BallDirector, Bounce Back Resilience

Graphic Artist: Sebastian Lörscher Graphic Artist, Visual Facilitators

Editor: Arno Waizenegger Programme Coordinator, occupied Palestinian Territories, German Red Cross

Editor: Suzanne Houssari Communications Manager, Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, American University of Beirut

Editor: Noor Jaber-Chehayeb Disaster Management Advisory Group, Lebanese Red Cross

CONFERENCE REPORT

CONTENTS

AGENDA

OVERVIEW

INTRODUCTION Summary of the presented examples concerning the Red Cross Red Crescent community resilience work

KEYNOTE ADDRESS The journey to community resilience: Has it really changed the way we engage with communities?

GRAPHIC DESIGNS OF THE CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

WELCOMING REMARKS

06

08

09 12

11

PANEL 1 Supporting community resilience through sectoral integration: Can humanitarian organizations and their partners truly overcome their silo structures?

PANEL 2 Supporting community resilience to prepare and respond to multiple risks, scales and partners: The example of the South of Lebanon

14

16

10

PANEL 3 Supporting community resil-ience in the challenging con-texts of conflict and violence: is it fundamentally unsustain-able?

18

KEY CONFERENCE OUTCOMES

ACRONYMS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSPANEL 4 Supporting community resilience in the challengingenvironments of fragile cities and urban complexity: What role do community-based organizations play?

KEYNOTE ADDRESS Supporting community resilience in life-and-death situations: Can the humanitarian sector really afford to spend services on underlying causes of vulnerability?

28

21

32

31

26

6

Welcoming remarksDr. Nasser Yassine (Director of Research at the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs Mr. Ghassan Hasbani (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Health)Mr. Mario Abou Zeid, representing Mr. Pierre bou Assi (Minister of Social Affairs)Dr. Antoine Zoghbi (President of the Lebanese Red Cross)

Key note Address: The journey to community resilience: Has it really changed the way we engage with communities?Mr. Marcus Oxley (former Executive Director, Global Network of Civil Society Organizations for Disaster Reduction)

Presentation: Overview of constraints in working on resilience within the MENA regionDr. Fadi Hamdan (Managing Director, Disaster Risk Management Centre - Lebanon)

Coffee break

Panel 1: Supporting community resilience through sectoral integration: Can humanitarian organizations and their partners truly overcome their silo structures?

Chair: Mr. Marcus Oxley (former Executive Director, Global Network of Civil Society Organizations for Disaster Reduction)

Dr. Mohammed Bendali (Head of Division of First Aid, Youth, Volunteering and Disaster Management, Moroccan Red Crescent Society)

Ms. Alia Farhat (Business Development Manager, Al Majmoua Lebanon)

Ms. Ruba Khoury (Chair of Lebanon Humanitarian INGO Forum, and Country Representative for International Orthodox Christian Charities)

Panel description: This session presented good practice, progress made, and ongoing gaps and challenges in establishing a common intervention approach across sectors within different contexts.

Lunch

Panel 2: Supporting community resilience to prepare and respond to multiple risks, scales and partners: The example of the South of Lebanon

Chair: Dr. Fadi Hamdan (Managing Director, Disaster Risk Management Centre - Lebanon)

Dr. Rima Abboud (Head of Disaster Risk Management Centre, directing committee in South governorate, Lebanon)

Mr. Mortada Mohanna (Disaster Risk Management Programme Manager at Union of Tyre Municipalities, Lebanon)

Mr. Kassem Chaalan (Disaster Risk Reduction Programme Manager, Lebanese Red Cross Society)

Mr. Mohamad Kresht (Head of Resale scout in Tyr south LITANE sector and Community Emergency Response Team coordinator in Tyre, Lebanon)

Panel description: This session outlined some of the challenges in overcoming the inherent diversity in mandates between Government actors, Red Cross Red Crescent, and local actors, and the added value of establishing linkages between different actors at the local level in urban centres.

20 February

9h30 - 10h30

10h30 - 11h00

11h00 - 11h15

11h15 - 11h30

11h30 - 13h00

13h00 - 14h00

14h00 - 16h00

AGENDA

7

AGENDA

Key note address: Supporting community resilience in life-and-death situations: Can the humanitarian sector really afford to spend services on underlying causes of vulnerability?Mr. Martin Kelemenis (Head of Protection department, International Committee of the Red Cross, Iraq)

Panel 3: Supporting community resilience in the challenging contexts ofconflict and violence: is it fundamentally unsustainable?

Chair: Mr. Nicholas Hawton (Diplomatic Advisor for the Near and Middle East, International Committee of the Red Cross)

Ms. Reema Draidi (Social Worker, Palestine Red Crescent Society)

Ms. Katie Peters (Senior Research Fellow, Climate Change and Environment Program, Over-seas Development Institute)

Mr. Mohammed Al-Fakih (National Programs Coordinator, Yemeni Red Crescent Society)

Mr. George Ghali (Executive Director, Act for Human Rights Lebanon - ALEF)

Panel description: This session explored some of the approaches being proposed and applied in implementing interventions in environments of conflict, fragility, and insecurity, while applying resilience focused approaches. Challenges were highlighted, and recom-mendations proposed for strengthening social cohesion and advancing collaboration for the establishment of a shared vision for realisation of long-term change within these complex contexts.

Coffee break

Panel 4: Supporting community resilience in the challenging environments of fragile cities and urban complexity: What role do community-based organizations play?

Chair: Dr. Nasser Yassin (Director of Research, Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, AUB)

Dr. Nehal Hefny (Under Secretary-General for Programs and Projects, Egypt Red Crescent Society)

Dr. Abbas Ostad Taghizadeh (Assistant Professor at Tehran University of Medical Sciences & President Adviser, Iranian Red Crescent Society)

Mr. Tarek Osseiran (Country Programme Manager, United Nations Human Settlement Programme, UN-Habitat, Lebanon)

Panel description: This session analysed the value of organizations’ work on different levels and aspects of resilience around urban centres, as well as raising challenges in overcoming inherent diversity in the focus and mandates of Government actors, the UN, NGOS, Red Cross Red Crescent Societies, and academics.

Closing remarks session Mr. Marwan al Awar (Director of Disaster Management Unit, Lebanese Red Cross Society)

Link to video of closing remarks of the conference https://bit.ly/2rsbhOg

21 February

9h00 - 9h30

9h30 - 11h00

11h00 - 11h30

11h30 - 13h00

13h00 – 13h15

8

The Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region is particularly affected by armed conflict and protracted violence. Countries within this region are also exposed to natural and other human induced hazards, vulnerabilities and risks. In the humanitarian context of the MENA re-gion, needs far exceed the capacity of states and non-governmental actors, requiring humani-tarian organizations to focus simultaneously on responding to immediate needs and strength-ening the resilience of communities and affected populations. Yet ‘resilience’ is not something that can be brought to communities – it requires a new mindset that focuses on processes and mechanisms to accompany, enable, and connect vulnerable groups to empower them to manage or cope with complex challenges.

This event aimed to provide a platform for discussion and debate, bringing together practi-tioners from grassroots organizations, governmental and non-governmental organizations, ac-ademia and the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement. In showcasing their experiences, learning on obstacles faced, and approaches and tools used to work with communities in challenging environments, discussions were initiated aiming at the development of a common language and a greater conceptual clarity around ‘community resilience’. In addition, exchanges and synergies between community resilience actors working complementarily at different levels and in different types of institutions were strengthened in the MENA region.

The conference was held on the 20th and 21st February 2018 at the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, American University of Beirut. The conference consist-ed of two keynote addresses, a presentation on the MENA regional context, and four sets of panel presentations and discussions.

This report includes a summary of the keynote addresses, presentations and panel discussions, summarizing the proceedings of the two-days event. The report also provides key points that emerged from a synthesis workshop conducted with Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement components working in the MENA region. The concept and programme for the conference was designed by the German Red Cross, International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and the Lebanese Red Cross Society.

The conference panels were organized around two themes.

Theme Day 1: Beyond Relief: Challenging Institutions to see the community as a whole

Panel 1: Supporting community resilience through sectoral integration: Can humanitarian organizations and their partners truly overcome their silo structures?

Panel 2: Supporting community resilience to prepare and respond to multiple risks, scales and partners: The example of the South of Lebanon

Theme Day 2: Supporting community resilience in challenging environments

Panel 3: Supporting community resilience in the challenging contexts of conflict and violence: Is it fundamentally unsustainable?

Panel 4: Supporting community resilience in the challenging environments of fragile cities and urban complexity: What role do community-based organizations play?

OVERVIEW

9

Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement National Societies as well as the IFRC and the ICRC have in-vested in community resilience in different countries across the MENA region. Examples of resilience pro-gramming of National Societies including Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and Yemen are sum-marised here as presented during the conference. Aspects of inclusion and social cohesion, stakeholder collaboration, advocacy, and addressing root causes are included throughout:

• Egyptian Red Crescent Society programme on ur-ban risks and community response in slums and infor-mal settlements including school safety and first aid, livelihoods support, hygiene and healthy lifestyle, and violence prevention.

• Iranian Red Crescent Society development of a com-munity Index of Resilience Assessment for Natural Disas-ters (IRAN) as a real time community disaster resilience monitoring and urban planning tool.

• Lebanese Red Cross Society strategy and pro-gramme for safe and disaster resilient communities through the integration of community-based and di-saster risk reduction programmes including working in informal settlements, safe schools initiative, com-munity first responders and disaster management planning, and community-based health and first aid.

• Moroccan Red Crescent Society in partnership with UNICEF acted on the mobilization of different sectors for resilience on: basic social services, good gover-nance, social protection and risk management, wealth creation, and social security.

• Palestine Red Crescent Society community resilience programme consisting of community-based interven-tions on risk reduction, psychosocial support, health and first aid, home enrichment, and public health in emergencies.

• Yemeni Red Crescent Society resilience programme to restore livelihoods, social cohesion and to pave the way for stabilization and recovery towards sustainable development.

INTRODUCTION

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) works to encourage and support three main sourc-es of people’s resilience within the context of armed conflict through their programming, these are: per-sonal, systems (including those of RCRC National So-cieties), and values resilience.

Personal resilience programming acknowledges that although people are personally resilient, they can also be hurt, wounded, detained, tortured, sep-arated from their families, or become the victims of sexual exploitation. The ICRC works with people on their protection and assistance needs and supports them to overcome major challenges including dis-ability and trauma. This involves intimate psycho-so-cial care, financial safety nets, and ensuring access to wider systems of health, work and welfare. Put-ting cash into people’s hands through cash transfer programming also gives people autonomy, choice, and independence – putting them in charge of their well-being.

Systems resilience programming aims to maintain essential basic services without which people will struggle to survive and protect their families, in-cluding power supply, water treatment and distribu-tion, health services, and connectivity. In advanced economies sophisticated and interconnected urban infrastructure can be vulnerable to explosive weap-ons, falling staff levels, and reduced supply lines. The ICRC sensitizes parties on the long-term impact of conflict on critical infrastructure and populations. Technology has transformed many services, and the ICRC is now using this to re-connect people with their relatives. At the community level systems of self-protection are being established through new venues for protection in conflict settings by estab-lishing early alarm systems and contingency plans around schools.

Programming for values resilience involves the RCRC Movement’s tireless work to ensure the resilience of humanitarian norms ad values in the hearts, minds and policies of authorities and citizens.

SUMMARY OF PRESENTED EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY RESILIENCE WORK OF THE RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT MOVEMENT

Link to the Red Cross & Red Crescent Movement website: http://www.ifrc.org/en/who-we-are/the-movement/

10

The graphic designs presented within this report were cap-tured during the conference proceedings.

They depict key topics and issues raised throughout the con-ference and aim to contribute towards stimulating further discussion and understanding on what community resilience means in different countries, contexts, and communities.

GRAPHIC DESIGNS OF THE CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

11

Mr. Mario Abou Zeid,

representing Mr. Pierre bou Assi, Minister of Social Affairs, explained how crises, including Syria, which is now in its eighth year, impact across sectors and in terms of economic activity. He referred to how there was an initial requirement to respond to the needs of affected populations but emphasized the need also for a long-term cross-sectoral strategy. Mr. Mario Abou Zeid explained that this strategy required a shift in mindset from crisis management thinking towards greater incorporation of developmental actions for re-silience. Key factors include being non-discriminatory by providing more comprehensive assistance to both displaced and host populations and transparency and accountability at all levels. He also stressed the impor-tance of considering how Lebanese host communi-ties perceive the displaced Syrian population within their society and the need for a holistic bottom-up ap-proach by paying better attention to local conditions. He also explained the importance of collaboration, with partners from the local to the international level, in enabling the Lebanese Government to manage the establishment of humanitarian structures based on their learning from previous crises.

Dr. Antoine Zoghbi,

President of the Lebanese Red Cross, outlined the need for different strategies for the varied crises that Lebanon has faced, and how they have learnt from these experiences. He explained how the Lebanese Red Cross adopts a pre-emptive approach, designs their response according to the current challenges. He placed importance on community resilience and partnership with those who are the first to face these challenges, including civil society, especially when working in difficult situations. He closed by stating that, “resources are limited, but our humanity is not”.

Link to conference video: https://bit.ly/2KLoFor

WELCOMING REMARKS

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Health

Representing Mr. Pierre bou Assi, Minister of Social Affairs Dr. Nasser Yassine,

Director of Research for the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, AUB, opened by highlighting that resilience is not a ‘buzz word’ and stressed the importance of reflecting upon what resil-ience means in relation to the different forms of insta-bility being experienced within the MENA region. He also pointed to the fact that those who have taken on the main burden of the regional crisis, displacement, and economic instability within Lebanon are the Leba-nese host communities. Dr. Yassine closed by empha-sizing the need for the identification of both local and global solutions based upon the acknowledgement of shared responsibility.

Mr. Ghassan Hassbani,

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Health, brought attention to the impact of the Syrian conflict in Lebanon in terms of the unplanned expansion of Lebanese host communities, some by as much as a forty percent increase in population due to the influx of displaced Syrian communities. He also empha-sized upon the threats this brings in terms of both transmittable and non-transmittable diseases within communities, and the psychosocial impacts that Syr-ian and Lebanese families suffer due to the pressures of displacement, insecurity and instability. Lebanon’s decentralised health system and linkages with the pri-vate health sector and local level organizations were highlighted as being key strengths. Especially, that only 19 percent of the required budget, to meet iden-tified service delivery needs, has been obtained. This situation was referenced to emphasize that foreign grants and assistance cannot be relied upon alone to address the confronted challenges.

Director of Research at the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs

President of the Lebanese Red Cross

12

Marcus Oxley opened by stating that the concept of resilience has an origin going back 2,000 years and has been an enduring concept. The question was then posed, “why some nations are more, and others are less resilient?” It was highlighted that although con-texts and political situations differ, there are attributes, values, and principles which provide a good under-standing of the ‘DNA’ that makes people and societ-ies resilient. The overlaps between disasters, climate change, and conflict were explained, and their inter-section was referred to in terms of the need for a core of systemic resilience (or societal immune system), as a required capacity to deal with the complexity of risks we face.

It was explained that resilience is not a concept lim-ited to disasters but is used across different field of work, including engineering and ecosystems. Due to its breadth of applicability, the value of resilience was stressed in terms of its potential as a convening concept. At the same time however, this can pose a challenge due to differences in understanding and application of resilience, which requires clarification in terms of the ‘resilience of who to what’. In terms of people, communities and societies, this is about sus-taining livelihoods and well-being while living in dy-namic systems characterised by shocks and stresses.

In his remarks Marcus Oxley reminded the audience that resilience is a key attribute across current global frameworks including the Sendai Framework which focuses on natural hazard induced disasters and is an underpinning framework for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as the Paris Climate Agreement. The question stated as needing to be addressed here was therefore, “what is at the core of our development processes?”

He then explained that thinking on resilience has evolved recently. Whereas the focus was on: ‘bounce back ability’ in terms of recovery; then onto absorp-tion capacity in terms of preparedness and response; and later onto adaptive capacity and the ability for people and systems to change (‘bounce forward ability’).

The journey to community resilience: HAS IT REALLY CHANGED THE WAY WE ENGAGE WITH COMMUNITIES?

The role of local level processes for learning being indicated as an essential aspect needed for change to occur. The importance of the need to develop this capacity was emphasised in relation to the complex multi-risk environment with increasing unpredictability and uncertainty.

Reference was then made to the limits or thresholds and boundaries of human and societal resilience when populations are subjected to actions beyond the boundaries of human rights and international hu-manitarian law, including extreme political actions and forced migration, which undermines human dignity and can lead to adverse reactions.

It was highlighted that the most vulnerable groups within societies are often those most disconnected from support mechanisms and policy development. He also pointed to the prioritisation of large scale events (caused by intensive risk) having the most attention, whereas smaller scale shocks and stresses (due to ex-tensive risk) were more generally left to be dealt with only at the local level. The link was then established that, “affected populations are the primary bearers of risk”, and as such they need to be engaged in deci-sion-making processes with governments by creating a more enabling environment for community resilience.

The principles that need to be applied to establish this enabling environment were presented as includ-ing: preparedness / responsiveness; collaboration / connectivity; learning / knowledge; self-organization / local governance; diversity / optionality; inclusion / participation; social cohesion; and local boundaries / limits / rules.

The conclusion was then drawn that most affected communities, and often most excluded, are those that need to be involved in the processes of policy develop-ment through the establishment of bottom-up process-es and partnerships between stakeholder groups. The reason for this is, “resilient communities are the basis of a resilient society”.

Mr. Marcus Oxley Former Executive Director, Global Network of Civil Society Organizations for Disaster Reduction

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Link to conference video: https://bit. ly/2FTVrjT

1313

1414

Chair: Mr. Marcus Oxley

Speaker 1: Dr. Mohammed Bendali

Dr. Mohammed Bendali explained how the Moroccan Red Crescent (MRC) partnered with UNICEF to integrate Disaster Risk Management (DRM) and applied resilience principles into Moroc-can territorial planning (the lowest level adminis-trative unit). This was done by applying an inclusive approach in collaboration with municipalities, local authorities, civil society, and Mayors, with emphasis on good governance. This initiative was based on Morocco’s commitments to the Hyogo Framework for Action, and the National Charter for the Environ-ment and Sustainable Development. A fund was also established for municipalities and farmers to take ac-tion on developed plans.

This 3-year process led to a change in national policy for the integration of DRM into the territorial plan-ning processes. The reason for this relatively quick success was placed in part on the MRC’s multi-disci-plinary nature, which enabled it to establish effective partnerships. The challenge remains however that, communities’ expectations can be raised during the planning process, due in part to their long-standing perception of the Red Cross as a provider of resource, opposed to being a connector and enabler.

Supporting Community Resilience through Sectoral Integration:

CAN HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS TRULY OVERCOME THEIR SILO STRUCTURES?

Speaker 2: Ms. Alia Farhat

Ms. Alia Farhat explained how Al Majmoua, a social development organization, made the decision to take action in response to the Syrian crisis not as a hu-manitarian NGO, but based on their social mandate.

This process was initiated by holding focus groups with refugees to understand their fears and percep-tions and identified the need for income generation and work placements for vulnerable women and youth. These activities were reported to have good initial results. Ms. Alia Farhat went on to explain however, that people have still been kept in survival mode.

A major contributing factor was highlighted as being the top-down decision making of policies, and restric-tions on the collaborative development of strategies based on community-centric enhancing of livelihood options. Underlying issues of power imbalances and mistrust between local, national, and international actors, as well as sectoral competition over funding were identified as barriers still to be overcome.

This session presented good practice, progress made, and ongoing gaps and challenges in establishing a common intervention approach across sectors within different contexts.

PANEL 1

Former Executive Director, Global Network of Civil SocietyOrganizations for Disaster Reduction

Head of Division of First Aid, Youth, Volunteering and Disaster Management, Moroccan Red Crescent Society

Business Development Manager, Al Majmoua Lebanon

15

Speaker 3: Ruba Khoury

Ruba Khoury emphasised the need for a response to the impacts of the regional crisis on Syrian and Leb-anese populations beyond only responding to basic needs, but also through better engagement and im-proved planning on community resilience approach-es. She stressed the need for ensuring the inclusion of those seeking refugee status made ‘invisible’ due to policies including restrictions on registration. She also pointed to how this leads to barriers to access-ing services and raised the issue that negative cop-ing capacities are sometimes being considered to be contributing towards resilience – although they are not. The increasing role of NGO coordination groups was indicated as a key factor in establishing the red lines in the formulation of Lebanon’s Crisis Response Plan, conducting joint advocacy around the differing priorities at the local and national levels, and working to address disabling policies.

Engagement with referral systems and coordination at the Municipality level were identified as being key. Recommendations were provided for a revision of Lebanon’s coordination structures, unearmarked multi-year funding for local actors, and community engagement in planning processes. Ruba Khoury concluded by stating that, “our mandate is to reduce suffering, but we cannot do that without building re-silience – to do this we need to monitor whether we are overcoming our siloed approaches”.

Discussion:

Questions were raised on the relevance of talking about resilience within humanitarian action if gov-ernment policies and actions disabled this process?

Examples included Lebanon’s policies regarding re-strictions on establishing permanent water supply infrastructure and employment options for displaced populations. The role of misperceptions between host and displaced populations and their influence on policy was also raised. Panellists responded by highlighting the need to integrate soft components for working on perceptions, and the need for placing more emphasis on the positive impacts and opportu-nities that have arisen from the regional crisis. They also emphasised the need for cross-sectoral advoca-cy on long-term planning solutions for both host and displaced populations. Ruba Khoury stated that. “It is not that we do not want to work differently, but we [Lebanon] often lack the knowledge on how to plan and respond with a better resilience approach”.

Link to conference video: https://bit.ly/2IrBPch

Chair of Lebanon Humanitarian INGO Forum, and Country Representative for International Orthodox Christian Charities

16

Chair: Dr. Fadi Hamdan

Speaker 1: Dr. Rima Abboud

Dr. Rima Abboud presented how the South Governorate of Lebanon had established a Disaster Management Unit (DMU) in the frame of Lebanon’s Crisis Response Plan. As part of this process intensive risks including earthquakes and the outbreak of war were prioritised, and vulnerable governorates were prioritised based on factors including weak buildings, their location on fault lines, and migration patterns.

It was outlined how the process of establishing the DMU structure had encouraged collaboration be-tween Governorate sections in partnership with the Lebanese Red Cross. Examples of actions undertak-en included the development of evacuation plans for hospitals and the training of local level first respond-ers. The main change resulting from this initiative was indicated as a shift from theoretical contingency plan-ning to a greater focus on building essential capaci-ties at different levels.

Speaker 2: Mr. Mortada Mohanna

Mr. Mortada Mohanna continued by explaining how prior to this initiative, local actors had been trying to fulfil their individual roles and mandates, but due to the lack of a collaborative approach, this had led at times to clashes when responding to emergencies.He continued to explain that within the current initia-tive local actors were engaged in the process at the Municipal Union level, which included among others the Scouts, Ministries, and local hospital representa-tives. Mr. Mohanna described how this had helped to build relationships between the actors. He indicated how this led to joint learning through the participato-ry development of protocols and experience sharing, achieved by conducting several trainings. Importance was also placed on continuing the process to further reduce dependence upon external response assis-tance, and on the need to continue raising awareness to influence the risk misperceptions of the population within the region.

Supporting community resilience to prepare and respond to multiple risks, scales and partners: THE EXAMPLE OF THE SOUTH OF LEBANONThis session outlined some of the challenges in overcoming the inherent diversity in mandates between Government actors, Red Cross Red Crescent, and local actors, and the added value of establishing linkages between different actors at the local level in urban centres.

PANEL 2

Head of Disaster Risk Management Centre, directing committee in South governorate, Lebanon

Disaster Risk Management Programme Manager at Union of Tyre Municipali-ties, Lebanon

Managing Director, Disaster Risk Management Centre - Lebanon

17

Speaker 3: Mr. Kassem Chaalan

Mr. Kassem Chaalan highlighted how the current Syri-an crisis had placed additional pressure on institutions and explained the Lebanese Red Cross’ role in con-necting and building the capacities of different actors. He explained how the LRC also supports communities to assess their vulnerabilities and the need to collab-orate with other actors to support effective planning processes. He also highlighted the importance of the principles, image, and the acceptance and respect of the Red Cross in enabling this type of process.

Mr. Chaalan explained the 3 phases to LRC resilience programming:

Phase 1: Intensive focus on capacity-building, starting from the first day to enable communities to work independently;

Phase 2: Raising awareness for cultural change from unsustainable reactionary thinking – build a network in society and facilitating assessments and develop-ment of community plans while providing basic sup-port to empower those involved

Phase 3: Moving from coordination to collaboration to support actors to work together to conduct joint planning

by ensuring harmony between stakeholders including communities, and by networking at all levels.

One successful outcome of this process was referred to as being the Ministry of Education’s decision to take on responsibility for monitoring school safety. He con-cluded by stating that collaboration initiatives could not yet be replicated across Lebanon, but that they continued to learn lessons to improve their advocacy.

Speaker 4: Mr. Mohamad Kresht

Mr. Mohamad Kresht mentioned an incident that took place during a previous war with Israel when his friend died, which was partially due to a lack of locally avail-able knowledge and skills. He raised the point that communities were not only affected by large scale di-sasters but also daily emergencies including fires. He explained how once awareness had been raised, com-munities had been willing to engage in a local level assessment, planning, and emergency response ca-pacity-building process. He also highlighted a change in resource allocation away from political aims and to-wards reducing vulnerability. He concluded by stating how the process had, “created a family [of actors] with a common language and understanding”.

Link to conference video: https://bit.ly/2K1hTtB

Disaster Risk Reduction Programme Manager, Lebanese Red Cross Society

Head of Resale scout in Tyr south LITANE sector and Community Emergency Response Team coordinator in Tyre, Lebanon

18

Chair: Mr. Nicholas Hawton

Speaker 1: Ms. Reema Draidi

Ms. Reema Draidi started by outlining the situation of Palestinian populations that have been under occupa-tion by Israel for over 50 years including: disaggrega-tion of people due to the separation wall; isolation of communities from water sources; protracted conflict leading to the destruction of infrastructure, injuries, and disability; and high levels of unemployment and poverty. Also stating that, “I myself have been harassed at checkpoints many times”.

Even within this context it was explained that Palestin-ians are a ‘hopeful and high willed people’. Ms. Reema Draidi continued to explain how the Palestinian Red Crescent engaged with affected populations to en-sure their ownership of the programmes they develop. This is achieved through a participatory assessment and planning process run by their volunteers within communities and which ensures the inclusion of local decision makers, people with disabilities, youth, and women and children. Within this process populations are also informed of their rights and international humanitarian law, which is often contravened.

Challenges faced were explained as including the growing need for public health and domestic support services. The need to overcome the cultural norm that only men intervene in situations was also raised as needing to be overcome, whereby women also need to be empowered to intervene so as to provide more gender appropriate support.

Speaker 2: Ms. Katie Peters

Ms. Katie Peters began by stating that violence and con-flict are an underlying driver that also makes people more vulnerable to natural hazards.She referred to data demonstrating that disasters caused by natural hazards have greatest impact in fragile states and conflict settings and are more likely to lead to loss of life. It was highlight-ed that the logic behind the current global frameworks was to support those most vulnerable, but that this logic is not being translated in terms of an appropriate allo-cation of resources for disaster risk reduction (DRR) to fragile contexts where scenarios indicate higher levels of risk and disaster impact.

The need to give greater consideration to the dynam-ics of risk was emphasised, and that to work effectively on resilience there is a need to change the way we look at and monitor risk. Ms. Katie Peters highlight that pre-dominant thinking is that protection and peace-building needs to be prioritised within conflict settings but indi-cated how this is an over-simplification of a multi-risk environment.

A way forward was outlined in terms of the need for DRR within conflict and fragile state settings, but how this requires a different approach to the traditional mod-els based on decentralised nation state institutional sys-tems. The need was also raised for agencies to decide on their position in terms of the extent of their proac-tive engagement in DRR within these settings. For this to be advanced the following aspects were indicated as needing to be addressed: Increased exchange of learn-ing between actors working on DRR in conflict settings; revision of DRR toolkits taking into consideration conflict and do no harm principles; ensuring staff safety; identi-fying appropriate entry points; and acknowledging that there can be setbacks to ‘typical’ DRR outcomes within these contexts. Ms. Katie Peters closed by reminding us that agencies need to consider, “are we really targeting the most vulnerable?”

PANEL 3

Supporting community resilience in the challenging contexts of conflict & violence:

IS IT FUNDAMENTALLY UNSUSTAINABLE?

This session explored some of the approaches being proposed and applied in implementing interventions in environments of conflict, fragility, and insecurity, while applying resilience focused approaches. Challenges are highlighted, and recommendations pro-posed for strengthening social cohesion and advancing collaboration for the establishment of a shared vision for the realisation of long-term change within these complex contexts.

Diplomatic Advisor for the Near and Middle East, International Committee of the Red Cross

Social Worker, Palestine Red Crescent Society

Senior Research Fellow, Climate Change and Environment Program, Overseas Development Institute

19

20

Speaker 3: Mr. Mohammed Al-Fakih

Mr. Mohammed Al-Fakih started by mentioning the ability of the Yemeni Red Crescent to remain insti-tutionally resilient and to expand their programmes during the conflict in Yemen, and the importance of this within a context where the authorities are absent. He also referred to a situation whereby communities are in a condition of ‘intensive care’, and to the political ex-ploitation of natural hazard and man-made disasters. It was explained how institutional resilience was being worked on by integrating their programmes, through engagement in the national task-force, and having local volunteers based on the principles of the RCRC Move-ment to ensure access even in harsh environments.

In addition, the role of exploring a shift in mentality from disaster risk reduction to resilience was raised. Highlight-ing the need to integrate resilience into all programming and monitoring systems as ‘concrete’ actions taken in the process and the benefits to consider. One example was given of a health center that remained closed due to a fear of revenge attacks being carried at the facility. A plan had been developed to establish an RCRC health center in its place. However, during the participatory communi-ty-based process it was identified that people from con-flicting groups used the market areas without incidents or fear. When this was investigated it was identified that a tribal peace agreement had been in place for the market for 70-80 years with strict measures to ensure its enforce-ment. Agreement was reached to develop a similar char-ter for the existing health facility. This community owned resolution broke down the fear of revenge and contributed to social cohesion.

Mr. Mohammed Al-Fakih concluded by pointing to the challenges and traps in the use of terminology, and the need to deepen our understanding on what resilience means, and the importance of doing this in dialogue and through advocacy with other actors within our own contexts.

Speaker 4: Mr. George Ghali

Mr. George Ghali presented a study which identified significant differences in the concerns of Lebanese host and Syrian conflict affected refugees. However, on fur-ther investigation common defining issues regarding stress and fear of spill-over of the conflict, and survival factors for daily life were identified as the main caus-es of tension. The conclusion was drawn that to enable the reduction of tension and to increase social cohe-sion a combination of responding to basic needs and a multi-layered conflict resolution approach focusing on common areas of concern was required.

The findings of a second study on conflict were pre-sented for Lebanese communities hosting Palestin-ians, which were comprised of different religious, cul-tural, and political groups. The study identified several factors, including community perceptions, as having differing influence on conflict. It was identified that certain political groups had more influence on conflict than others. In different communities, religious lead-ers were perceived as having varying levels of influ-ence, but Government security forces were not per-ceived as being useful for conflict resolution.

The analysis of findings pointed towards the need for establishing dialogue between actors. It also identified a gap and need for authorities to become more engaged as a rights bearer. Proposed recom-mendations included the building of municipalities’ capacities to take a more proactive role in establish-ing participatory processes and to establish dialogue between actors for: the identification of local solu-tions; working to clarify misperceptions; the collec-tive development of policies; and for upholding hu-man rights.

Discussion:

In the discussion Chaired by Mr. Nicholas Hawton, three key aspects were highlighted for advancing on resilience within conflict settings: firstly, the need for respecting human rights and international humani-tarian law – ‘regardless of nationality’; secondly, the role and value of humanitarian principles including the setting aside of political views in enabling com-mon needs to be addressed; and thirdly, the need for the acknowledgment of the importance of establish-ing new approaches for engaging in participatory di-saster risk reduction processes in conflict and fragile state settings.

Link to conference video: https://bit.ly/2HXEUBc Web page referenceshttps://www.icrc.org/en/fundamental-principleshttp://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law

National Programs Coordinator, Yemeni Red Crescent Society Executive Director, Act for Human Rights Lebanon - ALEF

21

PANEL 4Supporting community resilience in the challenging environments of fragile cities and urban complexity: WHAT ROLE DO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS PLAY?

Chair: Dr. Nasser Yassin

Speaker 1: Dr. Nehal Hefny

Dr. Nehal Hefny used the analogy of a sponge soaked with water to represent a community and its characteristics in terms of its ability to adsorb shocks, and to transform. She referred to ‘resilience in all things’, including in plants, and their ability to grow in difficult places – but also reminded us that when these plants are put in a good environment they can grow stronger. The different defin-ing characteristics of communities in terms of shared place, experiences, resources, and exposure to risks were outlined. Dr. Nehal Hefny went on to highlight the ‘invisible’ communities of popula-tions displaced by conflict and informal workers. She described the drivers of vulnerability in urban settings including the growing poverty of affected populations in slums with poor environmental conditions, whose situation was contributed to by weak governance and unplanned urbanisation.

Dr. Nehal Hefny explained how the Egyptian Red Crescent worked as a responder, service provider, and as a coordinator to develop partnerships and to coordinate between communities and actors working on addressing urban issues and their causes. It was explained how this included a process of conducting studies on slum areas in partnership with the Government and working on building codes and stakeholder networks. In combination with an approach of empowering communities to engage in decision making processes, we were informed of a variety of resilience outcomes that had been achieved. These included the transformation of one community from a slum into a new urban development area, another community had been empowered to mobilise Government re-sources to address risks to children associated with open sewers. In another process, communities were mobilised to self-organize and to pass on information on cases of influenza, an action which dispensed with the need for an expensive externally designed solution.

In conclusion, Dr. Nehal Hefny pointed to the importance of building resilience on all levels of so-ciety, including households and institutions. The importance was raised of working to address the real problems and causes of vulnerability, as opposed to only administering ‘pain killers’. The need for the identification of effective entry points and issues of common concern, including through the development of effective partnerships and linkages were all indicated as being key in responding to existing and future physical and social challenges arising in dynamic urban settings.

This session analysed the value of organizations working on different levels and aspects of resil-ience around urban centers, as well as raising challenges in overcoming inherent diversity in the focus and mandates of Government actors, the UN, NGOs, Red Cross Red Crescent Movement components, and academics.

Under Secretary-General for Programs and Projects, Egypt Red Crescent Society

Director of Research at the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs

22

23

Speaker 2: Dr. Abbas Ostad Taghizadeh

Dr. Abbas Ostad Taghizadeh introduced the community disaster resilience indices model that had been developed by the Iranian Red Crescent. It was explained that this index had been developed based on indicators for urban planning domains including institutional, social, environmental, cultur-al, physical, and economic.

This tool was developed to both, increase urban planners understanding and to provide a real time tool, regularly updated from various data sources, to support more effective multidisciplinary deci-sion making and planning. This includes supporting institutions to make decisions about resource allocation. It was described how the process of developing the indices had required a reflection on the UNISDR definition of ‘community disaster resilience’, as this changes from country to country and from community to community. The definition developed for Iran was, ‘the ability of a community to co-exist, cope with, and manage disasters through an integrated, comprehensive, participatory and positive approach’. Within this process an analysis of the importance of the different domains high-lighted social and cultural domains to be of highest importance. This presented the need for a shift in the current mindset of policy makers.

A key learning point for the Iranian Red Crescent in this process has been the identification of the need for emphasis to be placed on their own institutional capacities – specifically in relation to sup-porting absorption capacity – in addition to needing to prioritise a focus on cultural and social do-mains within their programming.

Assistant Professor at Tehran University of Medical Sciences & President Adviser, Iranian Red Crescent Society

24

Speaker 3: Mr. Tarek Osseiran

Mr. Tarek Osseiran opened by explaining that a shift had taken place from sustainable development plan-ning to resilience planning as a result of a lack of re-sources at the global level, and as an effort to mobilise resources at the local level. He went on to explain the challenges of the urbanisation trend due to large scale migration within and across borders, and the pressure this exerts on vulnerable communities and slums. Par-ticular issues were raised relating to ‘invisible’ popu-lations, conflicting priorities of different actors, and a lack of coordination. Mr. Tarek Osseiran continued by outlining the two main tools that UN-Habitat applies to strengthen local urban planning systems.

Firstly, a neighbourhood profile, which is an analytical tool that helps to understand complexity of the crisis in urban settings, representing a platform for better col-laboration at the analysis, planning, design, implemen-tation and sustainability levels. Mr. Tarek Osseiran ex-plained that it is the local population which defines the neighbourhood area, and that data is collected through a series of surveys, meetings, and focus groups. Data gathered includes information on safety and security, mapping economies and services, and identification of open spaces which facilitate the interaction of commu-nity groups.

The second tool is, Regional Technical Offices, which are established under the mandate of municipalities with the aim of helping local authorities in identifying and planning priority interventions, connecting and co-ordinating with other locally active counterparts. This is achieved through engaging actors including social workers with linkages to refugees and other civil actors able to address local needs.

Mr. Tarek Osseiran concluded by how following this process had bridged the gap between municipalities and affected communities. This had also resulted in putting information into the hands of users, facilitated access to resources, and enabled stakeholder design, implementation, and monitoring of local interventions.

Discussion:

The debate that followed, Chaired by Dr. Nasser Yas-sin, revolved around two understandings on resilience in urban settings, regarding: firstly, the need for more effective utilisation of capacities to address shocks and stresses through improved urban planning leadership, to better enable the continuation of development ob-jectives; and secondly, an ongoing process of engag-ing and enabling the most vulnerable communities to raise their priorities to enable them to address the risks they face due to their marginalisation within ongoing unplanned rapid urban expansion.

Key issues raised within this debate included; the dif-fering priorities between the municipal and local lev-els; difficulties in accessing and including security data within risk indices; the importance of qualitative infor-mation in the development of community profiles; and the need to develop trust and to empower marginalised communities to ensure their effective participation in decision-making processes with other actors.

Link to conference video: https://bit.ly/2jG7IQb

Web page referencehttps://unhabitat.org/un-habitat-at-a-glance/

Country Programme Manager, United Nations Human Settlement Programme, UN-Habitat, Lebanon

25

26

Mr. Martin Kelemenis provided the following explana-tion of the ICRC’s understanding and approach to re-silience in life-and death situation: Millions of people across the Middle East have been suffering from the devastating effects of protracted armed conflict for many years. Hundreds of thousands of people have died because of a reduction in health services, or gone missing.

The people of the Middle East have shown the world that to be resilient is to be human. In their determina-tion to preserve their humanity and the humanity of those around them, millions of people – in damaged homes, in IDPs camps, in host communities, in hospi-tals, in schools, in places of detention, in local authori-ties and organizations - have been determined to live and contribute to a life of dignity in circumstances dra-matically different to what they knew before.

Humanitarian action can accompany and support peo-ple, but it can do very little if people are not determined to survive and maintain their dignity. Humanitarian ac-tion can encourage, enable and support people’s resil-ience, but it is people who lead the process by commit-ting to survive and adapt. ICRC’s experience is that the following three main sources of resilience are critical to people’s survival and recovery.

Personal resilience - the resilience that is inherent to the human person. This is our emotional infrastructure, which gives us the determination and individual agen-cy we need to survive. Our personal resilience often surprises us by its power and persistence. It is made of the fundamental human virtues know to religions, philosophies and modern psychology. An innate inge-nuity and adaptability, patience, and a belief in some-thing better than today which gives us the will and vi-sion to survive, adapt and make a new life. This inner resilience is really our insistence on a life with dignity.

Systems resilience - the physical infrastructure of ba-sic services and social and economic systems which we need to maintain a dignified life, and in some in-stances, to survive. It is our social networks – of families, friends, work, and good new people who come into our lives – as host families, unexpected helpers or new employers - which make up the social systems we need

to survive. Basic infrastructure, basic services and the economy are also systems. The resilience of all these systems is profoundly import-ant to people’s individual resilience. Without jobs or income, without shelter, food systems, water systems, health systems, protection systems, education systems, telecommunication systems and humanitarian systems of all kinds, living a dignified life becomes difficult. Armed conflict makes systems fragile and escalates hu-manitarian consequences.

The disruption of essential systems will push people to move elsewhere to seek for functioning systems. If we are to survive in the face of circumstances as adverse as those imposed by situations of conflict, we need an effective physical, social and economic infrastructure around us. Even in emergencies, interventions should integrate longer-term thinking, whenever possible. Being committed to the principle of partnership and supporting localisation are effective means of achiev-ing this, based on the moto, “as local as possible, as international as necessary”.

Normative (values) resilience – the basic resilience of the principle of humanity, and respect for it in law, which ensures people’s protection. As well as the val-ues and human generosity that people need to survive. This is the strength and continuity of basic laws and humanitarian values for a society affected by armed conflict. All States and non-State armed groups have obligations to respect the rules of war. If the rules of war are not respected, then the conditions of people enduring the conflict will be truly terrible and their in-dividual resilience, and the resilience of the systems on which they depend will be put alarmingly at risk. Unfortunately, these basic norms are often ignored or violated. We have often seen these norms in action as one family offers shelter to another, as vulnerable peo-ple share together what they have, and as people work to keep basic services functioning, or volunteer in local associations. Respecting and abiding by International Humanitarian Law to win the peace and prevent future crises cannot be stressed enough. As well as the im-portance of supporting the resilience of our shared hu-manitarian values and the norms they underpin.

Mr. Martin Kelemenis concluded stating, “can we afford not to include resilience as a central component of our response in conflict settings? We can certainly not af-ford not to”.

Supporting community resilience in life-and-death situations: CAN THE HUMANITARIAN SECTOR REALLY AFFORD TO SPEND SERVICES ON UNDERLYING CAUSES OF VULNERABILITY?Mr. Martin Kelemenis (Protection Coordinator, International Committee of the Red Cross, Iraq)

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

27Link to conference video: Day 2 - https://bit.ly/2KLtq1u

28

The following emerging themes and recommendations are outcomes of a RCRC synthe-sis workshop which followed the conference:

1- Defining resilience across different contexts

Working within the differing contexts of the MENA region including peace, conflict, and protracted crises, requires emphasis to be placed on different aspects of resilience. In peace contexts, this can be achieved by working on the establishment of mechanisms at different levels to anticipate, absorb, adapt, and transform through the establishment of principled, risk informed, inclusive and enabling processes.

Within conflict and protracted crisis settings, the focus moves towards the provision of services and protection mechanisms with a human rights and International Humanitarian Law basis for upholding human dignity and to prevent complete societal collapse. How-ever, across this spectrum of contexts some universal approaches need to be applied or enabled whenever feasible. These include supporting communities and individuals to: enable them to take action on self-help; to connect them for action on mutual assistance; and to ensure their access to the essential services they require - based on their own prioritized immediate and longer-term individual and societal needs and their inherent coping capacity and resilience.

Importance is placed on the need for defining resilience according to different contexts. However, the need for maintaining awareness on how the term resilience may become politicised, as has occurred for example in use of the Arabic term ‘sumud’ to mean re-silience in Palestinian society – sumud also being however a political tactic of societal resistance to occupation.

KEY OUTCOMES OF THE CONFERENCE

29

2- Strengthening action on resilience

The RCRC Movement needs to develop its institutional approach to strengthening resil-ience in the MENA region. This requires a shift from being seen only as a service provider towards being an actor which supports communities, and affected populations, by: accom-panying; enabling; and connecting them with the services they need.

Due to their presence at the community level (via its volunteers) as well as their role as auxiliaries to governments, RCRC National Societies are in a favourable position to iden-tify effective entry points and to provide opportunities for establishing and presenting collaborative partnerships on multiple levels and across sectors.

The current IFRC Road map to community resilience framework was designed for natural hazards and stable environments and does not serve the needs of the varied conflict and protracted crisis settings within the MENA region - resilience approaches and tools are also needed for working in these varied challenging contexts.

Agreed priorities:

There needs to be continuous institutional focus on building capacity to engage in com-munity-based programming for those most vulnerable, specifically including conflict af-fected areas – based on the humanitarian imperative;

Existing cases on the application of community resilience and DRR processes in conflict settings need to be captured and used to: inform RCRC National Societies’ strategy and policy development; for advocacy with donors, and to inform the global post 2015 agen-da, and to design a broader DRR and resilience programme for the MENA region;

A clearer distinction needs to be made between the needs and demands of communi-ties and affected populations, based on a thorough analysis of available local capacities – which also requires time to be taken to influence stakeholders’ demand-oriented men-tality;

The knowledge and work of the RCRC Movement, and other actors, already contributing towards resilience needs to be acknowledged and promoted across the MENA region.

Approaches for strengthening resilience need to give consideration to the main risk driv-ers in MENA region of conflict, migration, urbanization and climate change and how to mitigate their impact.

30

4- Conclusions

This conference posed the question: The global momentum towards strengthening com-munity resilience: Is the MENA region falling behind?

RCRC participants’ reflections on the conference included acknowledgement of the sub-stantial experience and capacity of actors within the region working on strengthening community resilience. This includes the systems that have been established and the di-verse approaches and tools that have been developed. The RCRC Movement is a global network with diffuse knowledge across a region facing different types of hazards, shocks and stresses – including conflicts, migration, urbanization and climate change.

As a region significantly affected by armed conflict in recent decades, actors supporting communities have developed specialist knowledge and approaches. It can be said there-fore, that actors in the MENA region including the RCRC Movement are not falling behind but have taken on an important role in the development of approaches for specific as-pects of community resilience within this setting.

Web page reference: https://bit.ly/2HXYb5Ahttps://bit.ly/2I0PO9q

3- Moving forward

Call for action on advancing resilience in the MENA region by the RCRC Movement includes:

RCRC National and Partners Societies coming together to adapt the IFRC Framework for Resilient Communities and The Roadmap to Community Resilience to conflict contexts by drawing on elements of the ICRC resilience framing on: personal resilience, systems resilience (including that of National Societies), and values resilience;

Development of coordination mechanisms (between partners internal and external to the Movement) for more harmonized and community-based approaches involving disaster risk reduction processes, with the integration of all sectors, for both complex conflict and urban settings – including working in collaboration over the long-term and at scale across the region on addressing root causes, while adhering to the principle of neutrality; and

Working on the establishment of RCRC institutional mindset and capacities to be able to deliver new resilience frameworks – through the adaptation or development of tools (including VCA) grounded in existing practice and learning, and by providing capaci-ty-building to volunteers on the skills needed to gain access and work on resilience in complex and conflict settings; and

Risk reduction and resilience strengthening efforts are to consider a wide range of strate-gies and interventions (including humanitarian diplomacy, social cohesion, and adaptive and resilient livelihoods) to address or mitigate the causes and impacts of conflicts, mi-gration, climate change and urbanization.

31

The organizers would like to express their gratitude to the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and In-

ternational Affairs at the American University of Beirut (AUB), for their efforts in putting this conference

together. Special thanks are reserved for the volunteering students of the AUB who gave their time to

supporting this event. Notably we would like to offer our immense gratitude to all of the National Red

Cross and Red Crescent Society members who work within extreme environments, particularly in con-

flict zones across the MENA region.

Thanks also go to all the keynote speakers, chairs, presenters, and panellists who took the time to share

their knowledge, learning, and insights, as well as to all conference participants for their engagement in

the discussions on community resilience.

The Lebanese Red Cross (LRC) and the Issam Fares institute for Public Policy and International Affairs

at the American University of Beirut (AUB Policy Institute) also thank the International Federation of the

Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), the German Red Cross (GRC), and the German Federal

Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) for supporting this event.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

32

AUB American University of Beirut

ALEF Act for Human Rights Lebanon

BMZ The Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (Germany)

DRM Disaster Risk Management

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

GRC German Red Cross

ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross

IFRC International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

LRC Lebanese Red Cross

MENA Middle East and Northern Africa

MRC Moroccan Red Crescent

I/NGO International / Non-Governmental Organization

RCRC Red Cross and Red Crescent

UN United Nations

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

VCA Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

ACRONYMS

33

The Lebanese Red Cross (LRC), currently the largest local humanitarian organiza-tion, is an independent Red Cross National Society established in 1945. In 1946, it was recognized by the State as a public non-profit organization and as an auxiliary team to the medical personnel of the Lebanese Army.

The LRC Society aims to promote peace, serve the society, and alleviate human suffering with neutrality and without any racial, sexual, social, religious or political discrimination.

It is led by volunteers whose mission is to provide relief to victims of natural and human disasters, and help people prevent, prepare for and respond to emergen-cies/disasters, and to mitigate the suffering of the most vulnerable.

LRC provides services to more than half a million people every year. The services include ambulance services provided though the Emergency Medical Services (EMS), primary health care through the Medical Social Services (MS), blood ser-vices through the Blood Transfusion Services (BTS) and disaster preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery services through the Disaster Management Unit (DMU).

Lebanese Red Cross Spears Street I Kantari I Beirut, Lebanon +961-1-373802-3-4-5pr.info@redcross.org.lb - www.redcross.org.lb - @RedCrossLebanon

ABOUT THELEBANESE RED CROSS

34

The Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut is an independent, research-based, policy-oriented institute. Inaugurated in 2006, the Institute aims to harness, develop, and initiate policy-rel-evant knowledge production in and around the Arab region; and to create a space for the interdisciplinary exchange of ideas among researchers, civil society and policy-makers.

Main goals

Enhancing and broadening public policy-related debate and knowledge produc-tion in the Arab world and beyond

Better understanding the Arab world within shifting international and global contexts

Providing a space to enrich the quality of interaction among scholars, officials and civil society actors in and about the Arab world

Disseminating knowledge that is accessible to policy-makers, media, research communities and the general public

AUB Policy Institute (Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs) American University of BeirutIssam Fares Institute Building (Green Oval)P.O. Box 11-0236 Riad El-Solh I Beirut, Lebanon 961-1-350000 ext. 4150+961-1-737627 - ifi@aub.edu.lb - www.aub.edu.lb/ifi aub.ifi - @ifi_aub

ABOUT THE ISSAM FARES INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND INTERNATIOAL AFFAIRS

35

The conference and this report were financed by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

3636