On 18 February 2014, the Humanitarian Practice Network (HPN) held an event to examine the challenges associated with prevention and response programming, the different forms of violence facing women and girls and the ways in which the needs of survivors can be better addressed in humanitarian crises.
This paper reviews the quality of evidence available today to support humanitarian action. It focuses primarily on evidence generated by the ‘formal international humanitarian system’ through early warning, needs assessment, monitoring and feedback, evaluation, and impact assessment. It also considers the degree to which actors in the humanitarian system actually use evidence to guide their operational decisions and policy formulation
This blog explores what community-based protection means and how it relates to Results-Based Protection.
In 2013, at a high-level event, tucked away in a London-based location, heads of state, ministers, and senior leaders from around the world, met to collectively commit to end violence against women and girls in emergencies. Through a Call to Action, mobilizing various actors to make individual commitments to address this violence, the world’s leaders, international organizations like UNFPA and OCHA, and international NGOs decided to break the stalemate and start talking, prioritizing, and mobilizing new ways to address the problem.
In December 2014, the Results-Based Protection Program hosted its pilot online discussion forum, Designing for Results: The top five characteristics of a protection program designed to bring about results.
Community-based approaches to protection (CBP) have largely been developed by NGOs in complement to the often more legalistic and state-centric work of mandated protection actors. NGOs have long worked within communities in crisis – including as implementing partners for the major UN agencies – so developing community-based protection work built on their pre-existing strength, experience and networks. Whilst there is anecdotal evidence of its success as an approach it does present some specific challenges in terms of demonstrating results.
The L2GP studies explore how people living in areas affected by natural disasters and complex emergencies understand ‘protection’ – what do people value, and how do they go about protecting themselves, their families and communities?
In particular, although it is not a new report, this study on Protection in the occupied Palestinian territories underscores many of the elements of results-based protection.