1 00:00:02,550 --> 00:00:07,290 It gives me great pleasure to introduce Ervin Greco from GPP in Berlin. 2 00:00:07,830 --> 00:00:17,330 And Ervin has just finished a study for the British government, CFD, professional development, a desktop review on what works in technology, 3 00:00:17,680 --> 00:00:23,850 and he's going to do a bit about that, but also about monitoring the impact of of privacy protection. 4 00:00:24,510 --> 00:00:28,440 Urban comes with fantastic practical experience with the ICRC. 5 00:00:28,440 --> 00:00:32,460 Things work with the ICRC for many years in the poor Cote d'Ivoire, 6 00:00:32,700 --> 00:00:40,380 Afghanistan and DRC most recently, and will say with some spells from October last year and the new. 7 00:00:40,710 --> 00:00:47,460 So we're very lucky to have you here with us on your whistle stop tour to England and 8 00:00:47,460 --> 00:00:51,690 also to have someone who not only has thought about this theoretically and academically, 9 00:00:51,900 --> 00:00:55,830 but he has done it practically at Operation in seven. 10 00:00:56,010 --> 00:01:05,489 Welcome back. Thank you. Just to add a few words to present myself and I'm working with the Global Public Policy Institute in Berlin, 11 00:01:05,490 --> 00:01:11,940 which is a small think tank, and they joined the GPI last year, about a year ago. 12 00:01:12,660 --> 00:01:20,160 And before that I've been working mostly with the International Committee of the Red Cross a little bit with Belgium and with the European Commission. 13 00:01:20,880 --> 00:01:26,410 So they everywhere and we started off in the path of Afghanistan could be why and then and 14 00:01:26,430 --> 00:01:33,180 last missions were in Colombia and in DRC now for the Global Public Policy Institute as well. 15 00:01:33,180 --> 00:01:40,800 Just that. I started working on a study commissioned by a different on I would say impact measurement and protection. 16 00:01:41,460 --> 00:01:46,860 And I would like to present you and discuss with you some of our findings we made. 17 00:01:46,860 --> 00:01:52,050 And we just presented this survey last week at the different office in London. 18 00:01:52,800 --> 00:01:57,030 Not to start with a few words on the background of the study. 19 00:01:58,170 --> 00:02:01,530 As you probably know, during the 1990s, 20 00:02:01,710 --> 00:02:06,570 development organisations and humanitarian actors started introducing so-called 21 00:02:06,570 --> 00:02:10,770 results based management to show where to measure the effects of their work. 22 00:02:11,670 --> 00:02:17,730 And this is sometimes called the accountability revolution, although some people would question whether this was really a revolution. 23 00:02:18,390 --> 00:02:27,690 Now, what is important is that initially this accountability revolution was limited to humanitarian assistance for the delivery of relief supplies, 24 00:02:27,690 --> 00:02:35,970 medicines, water, etc. And it took quite some time until this revolution spilled over into protection a couple of years. 25 00:02:36,390 --> 00:02:39,780 And actually the first guidebook on protection, 26 00:02:39,780 --> 00:02:46,320 which specifically talks about our monitoring and indeed monitoring and evaluation challenges in protection, 27 00:02:46,650 --> 00:02:55,220 came out in 2500, was published by IMF and ODI, written by Ludo and Andrew Petit, following from Oslo. 28 00:02:55,350 --> 00:03:03,120 And. So this was in 2005. And since then, many humanitarian agencies developed their own guidance. 29 00:03:03,120 --> 00:03:08,310 And I think we've become much better in terms of measuring the impact of protection work. 30 00:03:08,970 --> 00:03:13,980 But there is a general agreement that measuring impacts still remains a big challenge. 31 00:03:14,280 --> 00:03:20,700 And this is why against this background and this, it asked us to do this scoping study, which was a small study, 32 00:03:21,060 --> 00:03:30,420 and we only had 55 days, three people working on the project and we reviewed some 170 documents. 33 00:03:30,960 --> 00:03:39,270 I would say roughly one third was academic literature, research articles, monographs on protection and impact and protection. 34 00:03:39,840 --> 00:03:47,520 One third were evaluation reports, and another third how to document policy guidance, operational guidance, etc. 35 00:03:48,270 --> 00:03:53,100 So this is what we're going to talk. I would like to present to you, as I said, a few findings of this study. 36 00:03:54,960 --> 00:03:56,700 These are the main questions I would like to address. 37 00:03:56,700 --> 00:04:03,270 And we have about 40 minutes on what is humanity and protection and human rights protection and as you probably know, 38 00:04:03,390 --> 00:04:11,340 is some confusion as to what it means and what is the difference between humanitarian or human rights protection and protection, military protection. 39 00:04:11,910 --> 00:04:20,850 What are the main protection trends? How is success defined for different protection projects or approaches and how is success being measured? 40 00:04:23,640 --> 00:04:28,590 I would like to start with the guideline, the global protection architecture. 41 00:04:29,160 --> 00:04:34,590 So as you know, there are many actors who try to protect civilians from violence and harm in situations. 42 00:04:34,590 --> 00:04:37,140 Obama Violence and natural disaster. 43 00:04:37,830 --> 00:04:47,670 I would say the primary responsibility to protect, protect civilians rests with national authorities, the police, the army, judicial institutions. 44 00:04:48,660 --> 00:04:54,390 If national authorities are unwilling or unable to protect civilians under their jurisdiction, 45 00:04:54,600 --> 00:05:00,540 international actors who have a role to step in, peacekeeping missions, regional organisations. 46 00:05:00,900 --> 00:05:08,590 And this is at the heart of. Be the so-called occupier, the responsibility to protect non non-state authorities. 47 00:05:08,600 --> 00:05:14,620 There are also important prevention actors, although it is disputed whether they have a legal obligation to protect civilians 48 00:05:14,630 --> 00:05:19,040 instead of parties to international conventions such as the Geneva Conventions. 49 00:05:19,850 --> 00:05:23,900 I'm not a lawyer, so I don't want to go into detail, but I know that many live in the room. 50 00:05:24,440 --> 00:05:29,390 And I just want to say that according to some actors, such as the ICRC. 51 00:05:30,290 --> 00:05:34,910 non-State authorities do have an obligation to respect certain humanitarian principles, 52 00:05:35,450 --> 00:05:42,230 such as the need to distinguish between combatants and civilians under customary international law. 53 00:05:43,520 --> 00:05:51,140 I should also say that some non-state actors, such as the Free Syrian Army and pledge to support and to respect ISIL. 54 00:05:51,680 --> 00:05:56,120 And I think you had a talk a few weeks ago by Elisabeth from Geneva. 55 00:05:56,990 --> 00:06:01,610 And so, you know, that many non-state armed groups, they signed on to specific deeds. 56 00:06:01,910 --> 00:06:10,130 For instance, on the ban to ban landmines, other actors that are part of this global protection architecture. 57 00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:15,379 Diplomatic representations. Donors, international justice institutions. 58 00:06:15,380 --> 00:06:20,630 The ICC, the International Criminal Court, as a as a mixed tribunal. 59 00:06:21,740 --> 00:06:29,070 And then now we're coming to the topic this of our research, focus and humanity and all the organisations and human rights organisations. 60 00:06:30,130 --> 00:06:37,250 Now, these two protection actors have one thing in common they cannot physically protect civilians. 61 00:06:37,520 --> 00:06:44,810 What they do, what they try to do is to convince others, primarily 50 bears, state and all state authorities, to protect civilians. 62 00:06:45,410 --> 00:06:51,650 They do. They do this through various forms of private and public advocacy. 63 00:06:54,710 --> 00:07:01,280 She maintain organisation, do many other activities beyond advocacy and we will get back to that in a second. 64 00:07:01,820 --> 00:07:05,660 Now what I would like to do is to talk a little bit about main trends. 65 00:07:06,170 --> 00:07:11,390 How has this architecture changed, let's say, during the last ten or 20 years? 66 00:07:12,380 --> 00:07:15,950 And first of all, we have a multiplication of protection actions. 67 00:07:16,550 --> 00:07:22,970 And as you know, there are more and more UN peacekeeping missions or other international military missions 68 00:07:23,270 --> 00:07:27,710 that have a specific protection mandate that was given to them by the U.N. Security Council. 69 00:07:28,880 --> 00:07:35,120 Another important change. They are more and more human rights organisations working in conflict environments. 70 00:07:36,020 --> 00:07:41,270 You all know the work of Human Rights Watch, and it's probably the most best known example. 71 00:07:41,570 --> 00:07:44,780 But there are other human and human rights organisations working in conflict. 72 00:07:45,060 --> 00:07:48,020 This was not necessarily the case 20 years ago. 73 00:07:48,860 --> 00:07:56,990 You also have more and more humanitarian organisations that have integrated a protection perspective into their mission statement. 74 00:07:57,470 --> 00:07:58,490 So more and more active. 75 00:08:00,410 --> 00:08:10,520 Another change would be changes of the shift in focus from primary duty bearers, states and non-state authorities to affected communities. 76 00:08:11,120 --> 00:08:19,640 So humanitarian organisations what they do and they try to support communities to deal with specific protection risk. 77 00:08:20,030 --> 00:08:24,890 And that is also a major change. And we come back to that later on in the presentation. 78 00:08:28,010 --> 00:08:34,160 So multiplication of actors, if we're still talking about change, shift from duty bearers, bears to affected communities. 79 00:08:34,760 --> 00:08:39,830 And lastly, the broadening of the of the context, the contextual scope. 80 00:08:40,730 --> 00:08:47,390 In the past, the protection problems were believed to arise only in situations of armed conflict warfare. 81 00:08:47,930 --> 00:08:57,110 Now, today, there is an agreement, a really acknowledged acknowledgement that protection concerns also arise in natural disaster settings. 82 00:08:58,670 --> 00:09:13,260 A few words on evaluation trends and you probably know the Alma and Active Learning Network and Accountability and Policy Performance Partnership. 83 00:09:13,760 --> 00:09:18,070 Thank you. We'll check that. Oh, you're right. 84 00:09:18,090 --> 00:09:27,800 I'm sure you're right. Okay. About maintains the database, the evaluated reports database, which is, I think the biggest database, 85 00:09:28,220 --> 00:09:33,650 which includes evaluation lessons, learned papers, program reviews in the humanitarian sector. 86 00:09:34,370 --> 00:09:39,230 And now what you see there have a total of 100, 1100 documents. 87 00:09:39,920 --> 00:09:46,220 And what you see here are some documents included in this database that are related to protection. 88 00:09:46,640 --> 00:09:51,020 Let me start from 1992 until 2012. There's about 170. 89 00:09:51,710 --> 00:09:57,590 Now, what is interesting, what I found interesting is to see that the not a lot of evaluations were evaluated. 90 00:09:57,590 --> 00:10:02,120 Reports peaked in 2000 with 19 works published. 91 00:10:02,560 --> 00:10:07,470 And then it decreased. I actually expected it to become larger at the end, but this is not the case. 92 00:10:07,480 --> 00:10:16,100 So there seems to be a decline in interest somehow in at least in evaluations that are related to protection in terms of the thematic focus. 93 00:10:16,120 --> 00:10:20,110 There's also an interesting shift, I would say, until 2005. 94 00:10:20,140 --> 00:10:25,360 Most of the evaluations or a large share of them they focus on in refugees, 95 00:10:25,360 --> 00:10:35,440 asylum and many interviews with we spoke who have been cited we we reviewed 170 documents and we also interviewed 40 protection experts. 96 00:10:35,890 --> 00:10:45,370 Now, many said that the issue of asylum and refugees pushed to the margin and that your data focuses more on gender based violence, 97 00:10:45,370 --> 00:10:49,120 child protection, protection, natural disasters, protection, mainstreaming. 98 00:10:51,490 --> 00:10:57,640 I would like to conclude the discussion on trends with a few charts on, well, financial trends. 99 00:10:58,420 --> 00:11:06,730 Now what you see here is protection funding between 2020 12 in million US dollars. 100 00:11:07,750 --> 00:11:13,239 But this data only includes funding in countries where you do have the common APM or flagship, 101 00:11:13,240 --> 00:11:21,460 you know, increase from 25 million in 2000 to the peak was, I think 250 million in 2010. 102 00:11:22,780 --> 00:11:32,920 What is interesting, if you compare it with total humanitarian funding in billion dollars and you can see that the evolution is roughly the same, 103 00:11:33,310 --> 00:11:40,090 but here we talk about billions, though it increased the total funding increase from 1 million to about 7 billion. 104 00:11:41,230 --> 00:11:45,560 Why am I showing this? Just to to remind you that we are talking about very little money. 105 00:11:45,590 --> 00:11:49,540 So the large money still goes into food project, medical aid, etc. 106 00:11:49,840 --> 00:11:55,690 Protection only represents between 2.5 and the 3.5 of overall funding. 107 00:11:56,500 --> 00:12:06,280 This data comes from the financial tracking services, which is a set of questions regarding the trends or regarding the protection architecture. 108 00:12:10,500 --> 00:12:14,970 Actually, I had gone through this in terms of the evaluations. 109 00:12:15,690 --> 00:12:21,930 It may be there are less evaluations and maybe there are less playing time because of the nature of routines. 110 00:12:22,320 --> 00:12:28,950 Absolutely. You're right. So many organisations were not published data because of confidentiality issues. 111 00:12:29,070 --> 00:12:35,430 ICAC is a case in point. But still it doesn't explain as wide as decreasing. 112 00:12:37,080 --> 00:12:39,930 But you're right, maybe that's another constraint. 113 00:12:39,960 --> 00:12:49,860 Many organisations will not publish their evaluations, and the problem is that if a donor nowadays is a donor and commissions an evaluation, 114 00:12:49,860 --> 00:12:55,470 they would always posted on their website, which is troubling for many humanitarian organisations in terms of neutrality, 115 00:12:56,490 --> 00:12:59,520 no question about the equal protection architecture. 116 00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:04,620 You have civilian at the Corps and then affected communities. 117 00:13:05,370 --> 00:13:10,920 What difference do you make? Do you do you mean that some civilians are just not affected? 118 00:13:11,290 --> 00:13:18,029 Well, thank you for having me back. And actually, first of all, I should say that our study was limited to protection of civilians, 119 00:13:18,030 --> 00:13:22,750 the defence study, and it should actually say civilians and prisoners that are also protected. 120 00:13:22,770 --> 00:13:29,970 So part of I mean what humanitarian organisations do is visiting and security detainees or prisoners of war. 121 00:13:30,450 --> 00:13:38,300 So this is the first thing. And then I believe that this affected communities to show that communities are seen together. 122 00:13:38,550 --> 00:13:44,850 Many humanitarian organisations we spoke to say that they're no longer just talking to states, the non-state authorities. 123 00:13:45,180 --> 00:13:49,910 They try to reinforce the capacity of communities to deal with protection. 124 00:13:49,920 --> 00:13:59,540 And so their One Protection Act, which is how to between civilians affected civilians and state and on state authorities of the question. 125 00:14:02,130 --> 00:14:09,450 Good so defining protection. We have to talk a little bit about definition, but I will try to do that as quickly as possible. 126 00:14:11,520 --> 00:14:19,350 During the 1990s, between 1996 and 2001, the ICRC in Geneva convened a number of workshops. 127 00:14:20,010 --> 00:14:26,160 And I think the objective, I guess you would then of of the objective was to define professional standards for protection. 128 00:14:27,420 --> 00:14:31,889 Most relevant actors were present the UN agencies, including the OSCE, 129 00:14:31,890 --> 00:14:37,890 its ARE and most humanitarian NGOs and the ICRC, the Red Cross movement, obviously. 130 00:14:38,310 --> 00:14:46,290 Now, these, these the participants of these workshops, they agreed to the following definition, which was later adopted by the IFC, 131 00:14:46,290 --> 00:14:52,260 the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Committee of the U.N. But it is now the official U.N. definition, 132 00:14:52,950 --> 00:14:58,680 and the face protection refers to all activities and obtaining full respect for the rights 133 00:14:59,070 --> 00:15:03,810 of the individual in accordance with the letter and spirit of relevant bodies of law, 134 00:15:04,750 --> 00:15:09,990 relevant authorities of law into human rights law, international humanitarian law and refugee law. 135 00:15:11,400 --> 00:15:15,000 Now, this is where many problems start with confusion comes from. 136 00:15:15,450 --> 00:15:20,820 So this definition is considered both too broad, Antoinette Narrow. 137 00:15:21,420 --> 00:15:26,910 It is too broad because any human brain activity can be linked to human rights law. 138 00:15:27,330 --> 00:15:32,350 For instance, if you distribute fufu to civilians in situations of natural disaster, 139 00:15:32,430 --> 00:15:39,780 our hopefully you are helping those who enjoy the right to adequate food which is enshrined in international human rights law. 140 00:15:40,590 --> 00:15:47,730 And this is actually the reason why some organisations such as the UNHCR and they label almost everything they do as protection. 141 00:15:48,810 --> 00:15:53,430 Now the definition is at the same time too narrow because you may soon have to 142 00:15:53,430 --> 00:15:59,040 implement a number of non-lethal activities which do not fall under this definition. 143 00:15:59,880 --> 00:16:07,920 And let me give you one example. For instance, the main action, as you may know, mine action is one thematic area of the global protection cluster. 144 00:16:07,920 --> 00:16:10,380 I think there are 13 thematic areas. 145 00:16:11,010 --> 00:16:21,480 Now, mine action can include activities to convince states states to sign on to the ultimate treaty on the landmines, which is a bigger concern. 146 00:16:21,990 --> 00:16:28,650 But it also includes other activities such as mindless awareness to help communities to deal with them again, talking about communities, 147 00:16:28,860 --> 00:16:36,090 to help communities, to deal with the risks emanating from unexploded ordinance, which is not a legal activity as such. 148 00:16:36,720 --> 00:16:42,540 So this is a source of confusion, I would say not so much in headquarters, but at the field level. 149 00:16:43,380 --> 00:16:52,740 And in order to bring clarity into the debate, many organisations and donors have developed what I would call activity based definitions. 150 00:16:53,430 --> 00:17:00,450 So normally the notion of protection refers to activities aimed at protecting civilians from violence and other patterns of harm, 151 00:17:00,780 --> 00:17:04,950 such as sexual exploitation, discrimination, separation of family links. 152 00:17:05,760 --> 00:17:09,030 And it also includes efforts to facilitate access to. 153 00:17:09,170 --> 00:17:13,370 Specialised care and reparation for victims of past violence and hope. 154 00:17:15,410 --> 00:17:18,710 Now, what we try to do in this life is study. 155 00:17:19,040 --> 00:17:23,450 You try to regroup or to group the difference or the different protection activities. 156 00:17:23,950 --> 00:17:30,020 We came up with the following division or typology, and we have developed three approaches. 157 00:17:30,530 --> 00:17:33,890 The first one is remedial action. The second one adaptation. 158 00:17:34,100 --> 00:17:35,330 And the third one prevention. 159 00:17:36,320 --> 00:17:46,340 Remedial action refers to remedy, providing remedy to refer to individual victims of harm and medical assistance to relevant victims. 160 00:17:46,340 --> 00:17:52,490 For instance, psychosocial counselling, counselling services to civilians, traumatised by violence, 161 00:17:52,880 --> 00:17:59,600 family reunification, tracing activities, and also legal support to victims of reparation. 162 00:18:00,470 --> 00:18:07,250 As you know, in many conflicts, the main protection concern for civilians is access to land titles. 163 00:18:07,580 --> 00:18:10,130 And you have a number of organisations such as. 164 00:18:10,990 --> 00:18:19,770 The NRC, the Region Refugee Council, which provides legal aid to civilians seeking, for instance, to receive land titles. 165 00:18:20,580 --> 00:18:24,210 Adaptation is about reducing risk exposure. 166 00:18:25,020 --> 00:18:29,490 This includes so-called protection mainstreaming activities. 167 00:18:30,930 --> 00:18:40,110 The classical example of protection, mainstreaming higher firewood distributions inside the camps to ensure that women women don't 168 00:18:40,110 --> 00:18:46,530 have to collect firewood in surrounding areas where the risk of rape may be particularly high. 169 00:18:47,690 --> 00:18:51,030 And so this is about good programming, if not about promoting the law. 170 00:18:51,960 --> 00:19:01,470 Another example is the installation of adequate lightning inside IDP camps to ensure that women to reduce the risk of rape at Night-Time. 171 00:19:02,430 --> 00:19:06,510 Community based protection. We mentioned mine risk awareness. 172 00:19:06,780 --> 00:19:07,860 This was one example. 173 00:19:08,280 --> 00:19:16,320 As I said, this is important because more and more humanitarian actors and seek to strengthen communities to help them to deal with protection lives. 174 00:19:17,130 --> 00:19:20,650 Let me give you one other example from my own experience. 175 00:19:21,390 --> 00:19:24,540 When I was working with the ICRC in Colombia, 176 00:19:26,400 --> 00:19:37,080 we observed that indigenous communities had had the coping mechanism to regroup in specific houses when fighting erupted in surrounding areas. 177 00:19:38,070 --> 00:19:45,180 Now, what the ICRC did well, I should say that they removed the community houses which were built of traditional material, 178 00:19:45,240 --> 00:19:50,580 wooden planks, wooden panels, which didn't provide a good protection. 179 00:19:51,000 --> 00:19:55,290 So what the ICRC did there? They reinforced these community houses. 180 00:19:55,290 --> 00:20:00,630 They built brick walls to provide greater protection against stray bullets and other explosive weapons. 181 00:20:01,380 --> 00:20:05,550 Now, this is another example of a of an activity which is not of a legal nature. 182 00:20:05,560 --> 00:20:09,930 It's more about engineering, I would say. Let's move on. 183 00:20:09,940 --> 00:20:17,760 Prevention, promoting respect for and compliance with international humanitarian law, international human rights law. 184 00:20:18,690 --> 00:20:27,450 And now this is about convincing major forces in Afghanistan to stop their reliance or to reduce their reliance on air bombardments. 185 00:20:27,840 --> 00:20:31,500 It's about convincing non-state armed groups to not recruit child soldiers. 186 00:20:32,220 --> 00:20:35,760 And this is done through public and private advocacy. 187 00:20:36,600 --> 00:20:42,090 Prevention also includes legal training with police, security forces, armed groups, militias. 188 00:20:43,380 --> 00:20:48,030 I should say that this is becoming more and more complicated in certain contexts. 189 00:20:48,600 --> 00:20:54,239 And as you know, you have counterterrorism legislations in many donor countries. 190 00:20:54,240 --> 00:20:58,290 So it is not so easy nowadays to carry out the need training with an armed group 191 00:20:58,290 --> 00:21:02,190 that is listed as a terrorist organisation such as the Taliban or al-Shabab. 192 00:21:04,680 --> 00:21:12,030 Technical support for the implementation of ISIL, for the for the incorporation of ISIL international law. 193 00:21:12,180 --> 00:21:18,600 This also falls under the third approach. Now, why why is this distinction important? 194 00:21:19,170 --> 00:21:24,600 I think, first of all, the scale of the mission behind each approach varies considerably. 195 00:21:25,020 --> 00:21:26,490 So what you're trying to do here, 196 00:21:27,180 --> 00:21:35,790 remedial action is essentially responsive to trying to help victims to cope with the after effects of war adaptations about, 197 00:21:35,790 --> 00:21:43,649 as we say, helping people to live with risks. If only the third approach is about addressing the deeper causes of violence 198 00:21:43,650 --> 00:21:50,040 against civilians rooted in under and under unlawful and how harmful behaviour. 199 00:21:50,640 --> 00:22:00,570 So this is important. Secondly, I would say that success is defined differently for each approach and you can be very 200 00:22:00,570 --> 00:22:05,550 effective in terms of providing remedial action to help the communities to deal with risk. 201 00:22:05,850 --> 00:22:10,920 But at the same time, you can fail to address the deeper causes of violence against civilians. 202 00:22:11,310 --> 00:22:16,740 I think this is important because sometimes you will hear critics say we have failed to protect civilians, 203 00:22:17,100 --> 00:22:23,700 but in most cases and reference is then made to the third approach, not so much for the first two ones. 204 00:22:24,750 --> 00:22:28,410 And I also think this is the third reason why this distinction is important, 205 00:22:29,040 --> 00:22:37,410 because the challenges and they were coming to an end solving the challenges in terms of measuring impact are very different for each approach. 206 00:22:37,960 --> 00:22:39,990 But before we talk about measurement challenges, 207 00:22:40,530 --> 00:22:49,620 I would like to conclude this discussion and illustrate the links and the distinction at the same time between assistance and protection. 208 00:22:50,490 --> 00:22:56,100 As you know, normally we say that you have an excellent action as to two dimensions persistence and protection. 209 00:22:56,700 --> 00:23:03,989 Persistence is about ensuring minimal minimum material conditions that are essential for the survival of the civilian population. 210 00:23:03,990 --> 00:23:07,350 It's about water, sanitation, health care, nutrition, etc. 211 00:23:07,710 --> 00:23:09,900 That food security and emergency shelter. 212 00:23:10,770 --> 00:23:19,380 Texans about ensuring the physical safety of the civilian population and in a more broader sense, ensuring respect for the relevant law. 213 00:23:19,780 --> 00:23:24,089 The Classical Protection Activities of Public Advocacy confidential. 214 00:23:24,090 --> 00:23:27,450 Maintaining the confidential dialogue, for instance, to gain them into an accident. 215 00:23:27,480 --> 00:23:32,370 Talk about specific violations of international humanitarian law, prison visits, 216 00:23:32,370 --> 00:23:37,620 legal training and resolve as we as we said, and legal support for the implementation of HL. 217 00:23:38,430 --> 00:23:46,740 Now in the middle we have these other activities which just allow in between remedial action and therapy for medical assistance, 218 00:23:47,250 --> 00:23:52,770 family tracing services, protection, AIDS screening and community based protection. 219 00:23:54,300 --> 00:24:01,200 Before we talk about measurement challenges, do you have any does this make sense and do you have any comments regarding this typology? 220 00:24:04,790 --> 00:24:11,409 Have you have you looked at security and safety, security and ocean safety, security, 221 00:24:11,410 --> 00:24:20,410 and whether you need simple protection and some people would define it as a protection for you. 222 00:24:20,830 --> 00:24:25,030 And none of those were. You mean armed protection, protecting civilians? 223 00:24:25,480 --> 00:24:28,930 Yeah. The more sort of concrete security. See? 224 00:24:30,220 --> 00:24:32,290 Yes. And this is obviously very relevant. 225 00:24:32,290 --> 00:24:39,519 But as we said before, when we talked about this protection architecture, our focus is is on humanitarian and human rights protection. 226 00:24:39,520 --> 00:24:47,200 So humanitarian and human rights organisations don't have the means to physically provide physical harm protection by presence. 227 00:24:47,500 --> 00:24:54,320 So. And yes, you could say that the protective presence, as is sometimes called, 228 00:24:54,770 --> 00:25:00,229 but it's not about it's not about protecting them directly from physical violence. 229 00:25:00,230 --> 00:25:03,290 No other questions. 230 00:25:05,570 --> 00:25:09,920 This is all to one of the measurement challenges. 231 00:25:10,190 --> 00:25:13,640 Now, when you ask people why is it difficult to measure impact and protection? 232 00:25:13,970 --> 00:25:18,260 And again, we talk about human rights and dignity and protection. This is the normal answer you get. 233 00:25:18,260 --> 00:25:26,690 People will tell you that. And protection outcomes are less amenable to quantification than outcomes related to humanitarian assistance. 234 00:25:27,410 --> 00:25:29,990 So for instance, if you have a nutrition project, 235 00:25:30,410 --> 00:25:38,569 it is relatively easy to measure the way the body mass index of children prior to treatment, during treatment and afterwards. 236 00:25:38,570 --> 00:25:42,820 And you can say whether you have an impact. Now, this is obviously much more complicated. 237 00:25:42,860 --> 00:25:48,320 If we talk about an advocacy campaign, for instance, to to ban anti-personnel mines. 238 00:25:49,460 --> 00:25:53,690 Now, I'm saying this is the standard answer. This is not to say that it's not correct. 239 00:25:54,320 --> 00:25:59,790 But if we're honest, I mean, the same challenges apply to other interventions. 240 00:25:59,790 --> 00:26:04,970 The programs, for instance, complex development interventions to promote rule of law. 241 00:26:04,980 --> 00:26:08,120 In a specific country, you will have the same measurement challenges. 242 00:26:08,430 --> 00:26:11,120 I think we have to be we have to be a bit more specific. 243 00:26:11,810 --> 00:26:20,480 And what I want to do now is to talk about measurement challenges for each of the three approaches we've discussed before. 244 00:26:21,440 --> 00:26:25,160 And I will go through this quickly because this is taking longer than I thought. 245 00:26:26,450 --> 00:26:33,710 Remedial action, providing remedy to individual victims of harm and providing the path of violence and harm. 246 00:26:34,370 --> 00:26:44,270 And you're successful if your activities help to reduce the or restore authority, or at least enhance the dignity and well-being of civilian victims. 247 00:26:44,990 --> 00:26:51,650 Now, it is obviously very difficult to quantify individual well-being and dignity. 248 00:26:52,520 --> 00:26:59,840 What you have to do normally, you have to to ask beneficiaries so whether whether they benefited. 249 00:27:00,260 --> 00:27:06,050 So you have to ask beneficiaries to assess the service you are providing. Let me give you one example of psychosocial counselling. 250 00:27:07,010 --> 00:27:15,950 MSF is one that signs off on here is one organisation providing psychosocial counselling in situations of armed conflict and natural disaster. 251 00:27:16,730 --> 00:27:22,580 Now, as a standard practice, MSF asked people after their treatment whether they have been satisfied. 252 00:27:23,840 --> 00:27:29,180 I've spoken to one MSF member and he said the problem is that if they go back, 253 00:27:30,260 --> 00:27:35,750 if they go back to the people they have assisted after, say, a couple of three or four months or for half a year, 254 00:27:36,380 --> 00:27:41,300 they noted that even people who said that the service they received were very 255 00:27:41,300 --> 00:27:48,170 useful and they easily relapse into pathological behaviour after or afterwards. 256 00:27:48,560 --> 00:27:53,030 So what does it mean? It means that even if people are satisfied with your services, 257 00:27:53,030 --> 00:27:59,810 the impact may actually be quite low in terms of helping individuals to return to a normal life. 258 00:28:01,250 --> 00:28:10,820 Let me give you one other example. As we said before, family tracing and reunifying children with their parents is part of remedial action. 259 00:28:11,900 --> 00:28:19,760 Now, you might think that reunifying children with the parents is always a bad thing, but it is not that straightforward. 260 00:28:20,450 --> 00:28:30,120 Many times when you when you when you look at the parents of a of a child of a boy or girl, you ask them, do you want to return to your parents? 261 00:28:30,120 --> 00:28:33,170 They would say, yes. I mean, this the following thing. They would say yes. 262 00:28:33,620 --> 00:28:38,870 Now you bring them back to their parents. And then after a couple of weeks or a couple of months, actually, 263 00:28:38,870 --> 00:28:43,219 they are unhappy because they want to return to their tutors because they've grown attached to them. 264 00:28:43,220 --> 00:28:47,810 Sometimes they don't even know their parents. They've been growing up with with tutors for years. 265 00:28:48,320 --> 00:28:52,460 So what you have to do, you really have to go back to beneficiaries, in this case children. 266 00:28:53,000 --> 00:29:00,140 After a couple of months, after a year or so. But this is a problem because in most countries you don't have this opportunity. 267 00:29:00,350 --> 00:29:03,590 As you know, humanitarian projects are short, 12 month, 18 months. 268 00:29:04,220 --> 00:29:11,390 So we have to broaden the timeframe if we want to measure impact and reducing risk exposure. 269 00:29:12,320 --> 00:29:17,960 If successful, different risk mitigating measures reduce the the incidence of violence and harm among beneficiaries. 270 00:29:18,470 --> 00:29:23,930 Let's go back to the example we mentioned before distribution of firewood inside IDP 271 00:29:23,930 --> 00:29:28,610 camps to ensure that women don't have to go outside where the risk of rape is greater. 272 00:29:29,390 --> 00:29:38,240 Now, what is the problem here? Sexual violence in developing countries and in the UK is a sensitive issue 273 00:29:38,600 --> 00:29:42,530 and it can be difficult to measure the incidence of sexual violence directly. 274 00:29:42,560 --> 00:29:45,889 You cannot go through women who receive firewood in Africa. 275 00:29:45,890 --> 00:29:49,430 So have you been less exposed to. Sexual violence. This is not possible. 276 00:29:49,970 --> 00:29:53,990 Now you have to recall it and look to identify proxy measures. 277 00:29:54,560 --> 00:29:56,900 And what examples are patterns of movement? 278 00:29:57,650 --> 00:30:06,700 And is it actually one to say that, for example, there are more and more humanitarian organisations have been very innovative in this regard. 279 00:30:06,710 --> 00:30:13,040 And let me give you one example of a WFP project in some areas like Kenya. 280 00:30:13,670 --> 00:30:17,660 What WFP did with the project project that started last year, 281 00:30:18,160 --> 00:30:24,860 and they distributed fuel efficient stoves to women in refugee camps along the border with Somalia, 282 00:30:25,580 --> 00:30:30,740 and they don't ask women whether they are less subject or exposed to sexual violence. 283 00:30:31,040 --> 00:30:37,220 They ask them whether they've reduced the time they spent outside that IDP to their their IDP camp. 284 00:30:37,810 --> 00:30:46,280 Then they compare this with a group of women that have not received fuel efficient and fuel efficient fuel stoves. 285 00:30:46,940 --> 00:30:51,710 So looking at patterns of movement is the one possibility to get around this. 286 00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:57,290 And together, that's a very sensitive issue. Does this clear this example? 287 00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:03,320 Okay, now we're coming to the third approach prevention for women, living, 288 00:31:03,320 --> 00:31:08,210 respectful and compliant with humanitarian principles and relevant international law. 289 00:31:09,140 --> 00:31:13,340 This is about changing policy and changing behaviour. 290 00:31:14,390 --> 00:31:21,890 The changing harmful policies and behaviour of primary duty bearers takes years and in some cases it takes the cake. 291 00:31:22,970 --> 00:31:30,650 So then you have a real problem if you are if your objective is to to convince non-state armed groups such as, 292 00:31:30,650 --> 00:31:38,270 let's say, Eastern Congo Lord's Resistance Army, to not use child soldiers, you will not have an impact within a year. 293 00:31:38,300 --> 00:31:48,440 So you need much longer timeframes. And even then you need to be able to what you need to assess the impact. 294 00:31:48,810 --> 00:31:54,620 Then you need to have longitudinal data on protection trends and you really have to 295 00:31:54,620 --> 00:31:59,449 think of anything companies and future marriage reasons from programming cycles, 296 00:31:59,450 --> 00:32:04,399 a high turnover of humanitarian staff. So we're often in most cases, 297 00:32:04,400 --> 00:32:14,090 we're lacking data on trends to assess the impact of activities aimed at changing behaviour and changing on foreign policy. 298 00:32:14,750 --> 00:32:23,300 Now the third problem even if that final trends is available, attributing positive change to a particular programme can be very difficult. 299 00:32:24,590 --> 00:32:26,420 Get back to the example we mentioned before. 300 00:32:27,060 --> 00:32:36,050 And if your objective is to reduce child recruitment in Eastern Congo and you're working on you're engaging with the Lord's Lord's Resistance Army, 301 00:32:36,260 --> 00:32:39,680 but at some point you know that child recruitment are going down. 302 00:32:39,980 --> 00:32:46,879 It is very difficult to explain whether this was due to your successful advocacy effort or 303 00:32:46,880 --> 00:32:52,910 maybe it was simply due to the successful military campaign carried out by U.N. forces. 304 00:32:52,910 --> 00:32:58,040 By the moment, maybe you have been just pushing LRA into a neighbouring country and this is the 305 00:32:58,040 --> 00:33:04,280 reason why the number of child and child recruitment decreases in a specific area. 306 00:33:04,610 --> 00:33:10,310 So you always have an attribution problem if we're talking about the third approach, prevention. 307 00:33:11,420 --> 00:33:20,090 Now if you agree, I would like to for me, these are the most difficult challenges to deal with and establishing that the UN protection or gathering 308 00:33:20,090 --> 00:33:26,930 data on protection trends and attribution attributing attributing effects of specific interventions. 309 00:33:27,350 --> 00:33:31,000 And I would like to go a bit more into detail and. 310 00:33:33,640 --> 00:33:45,280 Let us take a step back. How do you maintain actors and human rights actors collect information on trends normally to have a very pragmatic approach. 311 00:33:45,700 --> 00:33:50,380 You will try to gather information from as many sources as possible. 312 00:33:50,710 --> 00:33:59,260 You will carry out face to face debriefing with victims and their family members, with other diary witnesses, with community representatives. 313 00:33:59,710 --> 00:34:05,350 You will review national and international media so you can use hospital statistics. 314 00:34:05,350 --> 00:34:10,299 For instance, if you're looking at rape incidence, you can use official visual evidence, 315 00:34:10,300 --> 00:34:16,200 satellite imagery, vigils, etc. In most cases, you will not find a sampling plan. 316 00:34:17,140 --> 00:34:22,030 He maintains a very pragmatic about gathering that. So it's not based on a scientific, you might say. 317 00:34:23,080 --> 00:34:27,190 Still, such a pragmatic approach can work in certain contexts. 318 00:34:27,550 --> 00:34:29,980 And I would like to talk a little bit about Afghanistan. 319 00:34:32,710 --> 00:34:39,010 As you know, in 2006, the conflicts in Afghanistan, the current conflict in Afghanistan started to intensify. 320 00:34:39,550 --> 00:34:47,290 And what the UN that the UNAMA mission or more specifically, the human rights unit within the United Mission in Afghanistan, 321 00:34:47,710 --> 00:34:53,860 they started to systematically collect data on civilian death and violent conflict related deaths. 322 00:34:53,920 --> 00:35:00,100 And what you see here is death rate between the number of deaths from 2007 to 2012. 323 00:35:00,790 --> 00:35:08,950 It steadily increased until 2011, and it's for the first time with a decrease in 2012, I think, by 16%. 324 00:35:09,040 --> 00:35:19,540 The report just came out a couple of weeks ago. You're not willing to step further and say disaggregated data by parties to the conflict. 325 00:35:20,200 --> 00:35:27,490 What you see here is civilian deaths and injuries linked to anti-government elements. 326 00:35:29,080 --> 00:35:37,590 This is the official then. And the notion for for for the Taliban and other groups. 327 00:35:38,190 --> 00:35:43,970 Now, this is the dark red or the orange fire. 328 00:35:44,340 --> 00:35:49,770 Pro-government forces, international forces and national forces, militia groups and others, I think, 329 00:35:49,770 --> 00:35:55,170 are those that cannot be linked to any specific armed groups, to any party, to the conflict. 330 00:35:55,190 --> 00:36:05,639 So, you know, an even a step further and they collect the data for different types of military operations here. 331 00:36:05,640 --> 00:36:13,560 What you see is civilian deaths and injuries caused by air attacks between 2010 and 2012 and death 332 00:36:13,590 --> 00:36:18,989 injuries and total the total numbers now these of this obviously are linked to have mostly linked 333 00:36:18,990 --> 00:36:24,690 to international or here the civilian deaths and injuries are caused by international forces because 334 00:36:24,690 --> 00:36:30,060 they are the only ones carrying out until recently or at least carrying out air and air strikes. 335 00:36:32,900 --> 00:36:37,910 Afghanistan is an exception. You will not find such detailed data in other contexts. 336 00:36:39,710 --> 00:36:45,530 I think what you've done, I think in this pragmatic way and I hadn't mentioned that before, there was no I mean, 337 00:36:45,530 --> 00:36:51,739 how did they collect this data was from person personal network in talking to the staff members in different field offices, 338 00:36:51,740 --> 00:36:55,580 talking to the families, talking to the police, talking to journalists, etc., 339 00:36:56,040 --> 00:36:59,450 as I said, gathering as much information as you can in a very pragmatic manner. 340 00:36:59,990 --> 00:37:10,070 Now, this data proved to be very useful because it's instigated debate and it received international and national media coverage. 341 00:37:10,430 --> 00:37:13,880 Even the Taliban refer to this data and you have some kind of discussion. 342 00:37:14,930 --> 00:37:25,850 And I should say then if we talk about civilian deaths caused by air strikes and air and air strikes and they freeze since 2007, 343 00:37:27,250 --> 00:37:31,340 and you might say that this was useless because it didn't have any impact. 344 00:37:31,820 --> 00:37:35,540 But those who collected the data and I think they're right, 345 00:37:35,540 --> 00:37:41,870 they say that the overall increase in civilian casualties was much lower than the increase in air strikes. 346 00:37:42,170 --> 00:37:49,640 So it hasn't it had a positive impact. Now, there are there are clear limitations to such kind of data collection. 347 00:37:50,150 --> 00:37:57,490 I think it worked in Afghanistan, but it is not suited to collect or to document less visible protection problems. 348 00:37:57,500 --> 00:38:00,680 Sexual violence, torture are examples. 349 00:38:01,670 --> 00:38:03,770 It is not suitable to establish trends, 350 00:38:03,770 --> 00:38:11,480 protection trends in areas where the presence of humanitarian and human rights actors is weak and subject to fluctuations. 351 00:38:12,410 --> 00:38:18,410 I will explain what I mean by that, and I'm just picking randomly another example, DRC. 352 00:38:18,620 --> 00:38:23,600 I've worked there. So in the DRC, as you know, very few. 353 00:38:23,930 --> 00:38:29,750 The Democratic Republic of Congo is one of the biggest humanitarian crises that we know very, very little about trends. 354 00:38:30,440 --> 00:38:34,430 You have a serious problem of sexual violence, display, forced displacement. 355 00:38:34,820 --> 00:38:39,620 And we really we still don't know. We cannot make any clear. 356 00:38:39,920 --> 00:38:44,540 We cannot we don't have enough information on on trends over time. 357 00:38:46,520 --> 00:38:51,980 So I would say if Afghanistan is a good example and or best practice, 358 00:38:52,160 --> 00:39:00,560 DRC is probably a worst practice example of why not only because humanitarian and human rights actors are doing a bad job. 359 00:39:01,000 --> 00:39:06,110 Simply because of of of the context. DRC is as big as Western Europe. 360 00:39:07,070 --> 00:39:09,620 You don't really know how many people there live. 361 00:39:10,160 --> 00:39:19,190 The estimates vary between 60 and 80 million and it is very difficult to gather data and in a systematic manner. 362 00:39:19,400 --> 00:39:27,980 You don't know what's happening in the provinces. When I was there in 2010, there was a problem because humanitarians left certain areas. 363 00:39:28,400 --> 00:39:33,500 So if you look at protection change, then you had less incidents reported. 364 00:39:33,770 --> 00:39:38,389 You had a decrease, for instance, in IDP rights once they returned to certain areas. 365 00:39:38,390 --> 00:39:44,630 But that there was that this obviously is not you cannot use this information to assess impact. 366 00:39:45,800 --> 00:39:54,050 What are the solutions? I think in countries like DRC, it's necessary to extrapolate from smaller samples of the population. 367 00:39:55,190 --> 00:39:58,460 The problem is using survey, for instance. 368 00:39:58,880 --> 00:40:07,190 The problem is that there is very little experience within the humanitarian community in terms of sampling and using survey methods. 369 00:40:08,150 --> 00:40:14,930 There are few exceptions and I see that sorry, Oxfam is carrying out what are the Equal Protection Survey, 370 00:40:14,940 --> 00:40:20,300 for instance, I assume has been working with mortality surveys, 371 00:40:20,600 --> 00:40:28,220 but by and large there's very little experience using more scientific methods are more common in other areas, such as humanitarian assistance. 372 00:40:28,430 --> 00:40:34,580 But in prevention, we're not using such methods. So what we recommended to different is to carry out additional research, 373 00:40:34,910 --> 00:40:39,980 to gather best practices, and to look at other related fields such as development, 374 00:40:40,400 --> 00:40:47,930 and to see whether we can use methods in other areas and then apply them to to the protection sector. 375 00:40:48,330 --> 00:40:53,149 I think it would also be relevant to to see whether some academic or whether we can learn from 376 00:40:53,150 --> 00:40:57,440 academia and simplify some of the methods you might be using and use them for protection. 377 00:40:58,010 --> 00:41:01,660 So this is one recommendation we made so different. 378 00:41:04,130 --> 00:41:08,420 Any questions so far? Before I turn to the latest, the last section. 379 00:41:08,730 --> 00:41:12,230 No attribution. 380 00:41:12,530 --> 00:41:15,649 We said that attribution and establishing trends is a main problem. 381 00:41:15,650 --> 00:41:18,830 And the second problem is attributing success. 382 00:41:19,400 --> 00:41:24,320 I want to give you another example from Colombia, the so-called false positives scandal. 383 00:41:25,460 --> 00:41:30,080 In 2000 through when the new Areva government was elected, 384 00:41:30,500 --> 00:41:38,570 the Colombian army announced a very large military campaign in an attempt to regain control over areas that have been controlled by. 385 00:41:38,730 --> 00:41:42,050 Korea forces and other non-state armed groups. 386 00:41:42,770 --> 00:41:48,530 Not, in my view, is allowed to witness the increase of extra judicial killings. 387 00:41:49,790 --> 00:41:52,910 And I should say this information is out there in the public domain. 388 00:41:53,370 --> 00:42:01,940 And so what happened in Colombia, the army, they arrested people from marginalised groups, urban dwellers, peasants, 389 00:42:03,200 --> 00:42:08,960 dressed them up and guerrilla fighters shot them and then presented them as killed people killed in combat. 390 00:42:09,710 --> 00:42:16,100 And you can see everybody in the army has to produce results, as you can imagine. 391 00:42:16,550 --> 00:42:23,990 Now, this was a huge problem and you had many in Colombia, at least you had many national NGOs, human rights organisations, 392 00:42:23,990 --> 00:42:29,750 the media, but also international organisations that documented these cases of extrajudicial killings. 393 00:42:30,470 --> 00:42:35,360 And this led to a government investigation in 2009. 394 00:42:35,990 --> 00:42:43,880 And as a consequence, 28 military officers were fired, including the the commander general of the Colombian army. 395 00:42:44,900 --> 00:42:54,440 Now, this example of the case of the fascist positivos in Colombia is, I would say, a very rare example of a well documented, 396 00:42:54,440 --> 00:43:02,690 successful protection campaign aimed at promoting or eliminating and preventing 397 00:43:02,690 --> 00:43:06,230 violence against civilians through the promotion of behavioural change. 398 00:43:07,190 --> 00:43:17,649 Now, who was responsible for success? The OSCE, which are the authors for the High Commissioner of Human Rights, the origin, 399 00:43:17,650 --> 00:43:22,850 and the former head of the Research Office in Colombia, and Cristian Salazar, former. 400 00:43:22,850 --> 00:43:26,900 He wrote an article which came out last year where he claimed success. 401 00:43:28,790 --> 00:43:34,940 The OSCE that I was working on on this on the file, on the case of extra judicial killings. 402 00:43:35,480 --> 00:43:39,980 But you have the ICRC as a much longer and larger presence in Colombia. 403 00:43:40,430 --> 00:43:45,890 You have national human rights organisations that are very active in Colombia. 404 00:43:46,580 --> 00:43:53,870 There is the US administration, as you know, the US is a major donor to that in terms of military aid. 405 00:43:54,470 --> 00:44:00,210 And this is reasonable to to believe that the US administration or U.S. officials 406 00:44:00,230 --> 00:44:05,480 had an interest in convincing the Colombian army to put an end to this practice. 407 00:44:06,620 --> 00:44:11,960 The political opposition parties and all of this happened one year before the presidential elections. 408 00:44:12,860 --> 00:44:16,700 And lastly, you have the International Criminal Court. 409 00:44:17,870 --> 00:44:23,570 Colombia became a state state party to the the ICC, I think, in 2002, 410 00:44:24,110 --> 00:44:31,420 but the Colombian government said that it would not accept the jurisdiction of the court for seven years of amnesty. 411 00:44:31,440 --> 00:44:36,920 I think it was seven years. Now, this period, though, this deadline expired at the end of 2009. 412 00:44:37,400 --> 00:44:37,970 So, again, 413 00:44:38,060 --> 00:44:47,480 it is reasonable to to believe that the Colombian government had no interest in a criminal investigation by the ICC prior to the election campaign. 414 00:44:48,290 --> 00:44:53,270 So who is responsible for success? I don't think I cannot give you an answer. 415 00:44:53,930 --> 00:44:57,890 I don't think there is a statistical answer solution to the problem. 416 00:44:58,460 --> 00:45:01,970 Maybe some of you know more about statistics would argue otherwise. 417 00:45:02,690 --> 00:45:05,900 But I think we have to be very modest about attribution. 418 00:45:05,930 --> 00:45:09,500 All we can do is explain how the foreign actors contributed to success. 419 00:45:10,820 --> 00:45:16,940 But we also I think it's necessary to go one step further and we should take examples such as the. 420 00:45:18,100 --> 00:45:28,000 The case of extrajudicial killings then in Colombia and trying to isolate external factors that contributed to success in this specific case. 421 00:45:29,160 --> 00:45:36,879 And I think we can go even one step further and try to isolate or get a better understanding of external 422 00:45:36,880 --> 00:45:42,190 factors that enhance the limited success of different prevention interventions across different contexts. 423 00:45:42,310 --> 00:45:46,389 This is actually the second recommendation we made to him. 424 00:45:46,390 --> 00:45:53,860 Just provide me with a list of potentially relevant external factors military dynamics, domestic political dynamics, 425 00:45:54,550 --> 00:45:59,410 international political dynamics, for instance, in political negotiations to end the conflict. 426 00:46:00,100 --> 00:46:12,010 This may end the way and prove, for instance, the are willing to engage with humanitarian actors, economic factors over share of a national budget, 427 00:46:12,430 --> 00:46:21,940 but overall share of a national budget, UN peacekeeping missions and as we said before, activities of the International Criminal Court. 428 00:46:22,750 --> 00:46:28,120 So in conclusion, I think what we need to do to get a better understanding of what works and protection specifically we talk about 429 00:46:28,120 --> 00:46:36,230 activities aimed at changing policy and behaviour is to get events we need to carry out the larger research project. 430 00:46:36,250 --> 00:46:38,890 This cannot be done through an evaluation within a couple of weeks, 431 00:46:39,310 --> 00:46:45,370 but investigating to try to understand under which circumstances particular interventions can work. 432 00:46:47,200 --> 00:46:53,830 I would like to contribute here. I'm sorry I was a bit too long. Maybe with a final remark. 433 00:46:54,190 --> 00:47:01,719 I know that this has been a bit technical and it was about impact measurement and I 434 00:47:01,720 --> 00:47:06,670 kind of avoided more related questions and this was to keep the focus of the debate. 435 00:47:06,910 --> 00:47:14,560 But I think normative questions are very relevant, and I don't think it's possible to quantify everything we do. 436 00:47:14,920 --> 00:47:18,520 I don't think it's it's even necessary to put the number on everything we do. 437 00:47:19,720 --> 00:47:29,470 I think you had a presentation a few weeks ago last week, and by morning I started from the ICRC explaining what ICRC does in the prisons. 438 00:47:30,040 --> 00:47:35,860 And I think it's not it's not possible to it's often very difficult to assess the impact of such activity. 439 00:47:36,580 --> 00:47:38,920 But may give you a last example. 440 00:47:38,920 --> 00:47:47,950 When I when I worked with the ICRC again in 28 in southern Colombia, if I were going to someone who was facing hunger, 441 00:47:48,580 --> 00:47:57,940 we what we did is we did we organised phone calls between family members and detainees in Guantanamo. 442 00:47:58,180 --> 00:48:05,260 So families came to our office in Kandahar and we called them their sons or in Guantanamo. 443 00:48:05,410 --> 00:48:09,030 And this was of the telephone conferences. 444 00:48:09,470 --> 00:48:14,710 Now, for many families, this was the first time in several years that they've been able to speak to their son. 445 00:48:15,790 --> 00:48:21,200 And I don't think it is possible or necessary to to assess the impact. 446 00:48:21,220 --> 00:48:28,290 I don't think it is it doesn't make any sense to ask family members after this phone call whether we have answer. 447 00:48:28,300 --> 00:48:35,830 Well, and then simply by a little bit. But I think it's just morally important, something that is I mean, 448 00:48:35,830 --> 00:48:40,870 it's morally important that families can talk to their sons, even if they are defending the Taliban. 449 00:48:41,290 --> 00:48:45,810 So I want to conclude with that. Very. I think the normative questions are important. 450 00:48:45,820 --> 00:48:49,390 And you want to talk about them now. I avoided them because I was already too long. 451 00:48:49,900 --> 00:48:52,420 And it was that would have made it much more complicated. Thank you.