ONE UN - Integrated approaches for advancing Durable Solutions and the reintegration of returnees in Afghanistan responding to (WUF 13)

Thanks, everybody.
Thank you for coming and thanks also to those who are joining us online today and welcome to this session on integrated approaches for advancing durable solutions for the reintegration of returnees in Afghanistan.
Thanks, everybody, for joining in the room in the World Urban Forum today, but also, of course, thanks to those joining online.
So this is a one UN session because we really strongly believe that massive returns like what we're seeing in Afghanistan at this point in time, needs integrated solutions.
So in order to actually manage those large scale returns in Afghanistan, and here we're speaking about more than 5 million people in just two years.
People who've returned to a context where already nearly 50% of the population are in some humanitarian need.
We're speaking about people who are returning to areas where we also have a lot of people who've been displaced because of climate change and a highly vulnerable population.
More than 5 million people are returning from Pakistan and Iran to Afghanistan, settling across the country So in urban areas, many of them actually, and also of course in rural areas.
We're happy to have this session today because through an integrated approach, we're trying to support as the UN that people are supported in places where they have settled, and we do acknowledge that you need to have different entry points to making sure people are less vulnerable.
What does that mean? It means that people when they start arriving, they have needs like shelter and housing.
They need space, which means they need land.
They also need access to basic services.
That means water and sanitation, but also education, health services.
They need access to livelihood opportunities.
This again, also, as we're at the World Urban Forum, leads to a rapid urbanization.
We're speaking about more than 5 million people, that means that Afghanistan in just two years has seen a population increase of more than 12%, which for any country would be extremely challenging.
As I said, people move into areas.
They come with what they have been able to bring from the other country.
This is what it looks like when people are crossing the borders and when they arrive at border points.
We had an influx sometimes at two border points for more than 50,000 people every day.
So at those border points, humanitarian support is provided through the authorities and also through the UN agencies.
But what happens then? Then people return either to areas where they have some origins or they come to areas where they hope for having access to services, housing, and also specifically livelihood opportunities.
They move into areas which other people in vulnerable situations live in, facing the same challenges that they are facing inadequate living conditions, inadequate access to services, and a high level of informality because there's an absence of urban planning.
Then this is why an integrated approach is needed, combined through participatory approaches, but also area based approaches because those people need to reintegrate in a society where you have people with different backgrounds in specifically urban areas, but also in rural areas, people are not a homogeneous group.
I think this is why participatory processes are specifically needed to make sure that everybody has the possibility to speak to contribute, but also that reintegration happens through increased social cohesion, and of course, there are many other needs.
What is this session about? It's about introducing you a bit to the background in Afghanistan.
It's about sharing how the UN works together to support the returnees in vulnerable situations, and it's also there to give you an understanding how the different UN agencies complement each other in a context like Afghanistan.
So we're using this session to introduce specific approaches in Afghanistan which have been funded through the Special Trust Fund of Afghanistan as entry point.
The Special Trust Fund for Afghanistan supports interagency cooperation, and we'll learn more about that in a short video that we're going to share.
And then we'll also be looking forward to learning from other areas, from other countries, and what is needed actually to make durable solutions something that people can achieve in the areas they settle.
Let me start by calling the panelists to the panel.
So kindly welcome miss Carolina Codorscals, who is the global coordinator for shelter and settlements from IOM.
Please join us.
We've got Jose Barna, who is the Senior Operations Officer for UNHCR Afghanistan.
Thanks.
And then I'm also very happy to welcome Mr.
Ronald Jackson, who's the head of the Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery section in UNDP.
Thank you.
And together, we're here to make sure there is a cooperation and complementarity for supporting the most vulnerable people in Afghanistan who've recently returned.
Let me show you first is introduction, a very short video which the SDFA, the Special Trust Fund for Afghanistan has produced to give you a visual what the situation in Afghanistan looks like.
Pakistan strategy Samani strategy, the Pakistan.
I'm here today in Gulb Village, in Chadgarat District in Kunduz, and I'm really happy to have launched, together with key UN partners, UNDP, UNFCR, IOM, and UN Habitat, the Pida project, which has been supported by this special trust fund for Afghanistan the SDFA.
We are devolving $23 million to two districts in Kunduz and one district in Baglan targeting 57,000 families with key interventions to enable the sustainable reintegration of refugees and returnees back into their home countries.
A Zano Korea, zika Musar Missus.
Casas, Masa, Daria Guanas, Sunja Sadara.
A Hosaltz the elryak Homan Thank you very much.
I think those pictures actually gave quite a good impression of the situation in Afghanistan.
In this case, you were seeing pictures of the northern regions, the northeast of Afghanistan.
I'm now going to hand over to miss Del Mukherjee, the deputy Representative of UNDP in Afghanistan for a short introduction on the two projects.
PDR and Wadat which have been both funded through the Special trust fund for Afghanistan and actually are implemented as a partnership between the four agencies.
Over to you, Joel.
I hope you can hear us well and I hope you can speak and we can hear you.
Thank you.
Dear Stephanie, we can't hear anything.
Let us know when you have started.
Thank you.
Okay.
Stephanie, thank you.
Thank you for indicating that, and I'm just hoping that all of you are enjoying Baku and warm greetings from Kabul from all of us here and Sal Alikum and a lot of my colleagues I see you online to my Afghan sisters especially.
Warm good afternoon and I I'd like to at the behest of UN Habitat with whom we work very closely and especially Stephanie and all her colleagues in Kabul.
I'd like to talk a little bit on the durable solutions approach by the interagency coordination, and then I'll go on the two joint programs that we have and then round it up with a few reflections.
So in Afghanistan, the durable solutions challenge is increasingly an urban challenge.
Today, most returnees, internally displaced persons, and vulnerable host communities are rebuilding their lives not in isolated rural settings, but more and more in areas where there are opportunities in and around small and medium sized towns, peripheries of cities, and informal or underserved urban settlements.
Now, this reality requires us to rethink displacement not only through a humanitarian lens alone, but also through the lens of urban development, community based governance, and resilience.
At UNDP, we understand that durable solutions is not simply a protection outcome, but as a risk informed urban development agenda.
Durable reintegration depends on whether people can access inclusive local communities, adequate housing, basic services, tenure, security for land and property, accountable local governance, and climate resilience infrastructure.
The needs that we see are deeply systemic and interconnected.
For example, housing cannot be separated from livelihoods, or livelihoods cannot be separated from access to water, energy, and transport.
The tenure insecurity affects social cohesion and investments.
Climate risks, especially floods and droughts, further compound fragility, while weak municipal systems often struggle to absorb the rapidly growing population.
I'm sure that Stephanie in her opening remarks may have already mentioned that we have about expected 2.5 million false returns coming to the country in 2026.
Last year itself, there were 2.7 million returns and most of the areas of returns have been around Iraq in the South and the eastern regions.
You can well imagine that the shock absorption in already fragile settings is expected to be by the end of this year is for 5 million people.
Now, these challenges, as you know, can't be addressed in isolation or in sectoral responses.
This is why the UN in Afghanistan, we organize support around area based, cross sectoral and interagency models.
Our starting point is not a single sector, But the district and the local community itself.
The central question becomes what minimum integration package is required to make reintegration viable, resilient, and sustainable for both displaced and host communities? It is with great pleasure, my dear colleagues that I mention here, the one UN approach on durable solutions that brings UNDP, UN habitat, IOM, and UNHCR together and around the shared community action plans and local implementation committees rather than separate agency project streams.
This approach helps to ensure that communities experience one coherent process rather than fragmented interventions.
I'd like also my colleagues from the SDFA to please open your cameras so people can see you because I would like to talk about the SDFA now.
So in Afghanistan, a critical enabler of this work is the special Trust Fund for Afghanistan, which is under the MPTF.
Now, as a pooled and flexible financing mechanism, the SDFA allows agencies to work collectively, reduce duplication and support communities through coherent area based packages that combine basic needs, protection, recovery, and long term resilience.
Now, two important examples that I'd also like to highlight here are the approach to two projects.
One is called PDA, which is implemented in northeast part of Afghanistan and Wahab, which is being implemented in the western part of Afghanistan along the borders of Iran.
So PDR is being implemented in these two locations called Hundus and Paglan and this is for 24 month period supporting returnees, internally displaced persons, and host communities in displacement affected and peri urban areas.
The project combines risk uniform shelter, resilient infrastructure, livelihood, basic services, community governance, and protection support within one integrated framework.
Now, what makes PDOT particularly important is its community driven methodology.
As I mentioned, that we work through local implementation committees and community action plans, identifying priorities such as housing, water, sanitation, energy, roads, disaster resilience, infrastructure, livelihoods, legal identities.
Now, my dear colleagues, you will also probably be aware that the local governance infrastructure, the local governance councils have been abolished since 2024, middle of 2024.
So the local structures that I'm talking about are basically based on very local community based solutions and infrastructures that are already existing for many, many centuries.
So we are building up on those social structures.
Now, UNDP's role in this joint program, I'd like to highlight is that we are a part of the glue.
We integrate and we bring people together, just like my colleagues who work in the special Trust Fund for Afghanistan.
W one is the funding mechanism which is the SDFA and UNDP plays a convening role and brings our colleagues from the UN agencies together.
So in this sense, PADR operationalizes the humanitarian development nexus in practical terms, combining immediate support for basic needs and incomes with longer term investments that reduce future risks and strengthen structural conditions for sustainable reintegration.
Now, Wat, which is our second project, which is on the western side of Afghanistan, it is on a similar model, and it is across Herath and Farah.
Now, these two areas have faced drought.
There is economic stress and large scale returns.
So what we implement are actually in the city of Herath and the Pi urban and urban areas.
Wat combines climate resilient housing, water and sanitation, flood and drought resistant resilient infrastructure, skills development, micro and small business support, housing, property assistance, civil documentation, community resource centers that are built, and safe spaces are also provided for women and marginalized groups.
Now, importantly, Warbb recognizes that durable solutions in Western Afghanistan cannot be separated from climate adaptation and resilience of local systems.
Reintegration of water management, urban resilience, and climate adaptation must be addressed altogether.
UNDPs here, we contribute to connect all of these different interventions into one coherent reintegration pathway.
The broader lesson from Afghanistan, dear colleagues is quite clear that durable solutions is no longer a humanitarian issue.
The approach has to be is about integration and fundamentally, we see that cities, towns, local systems absorb shocks and manage risks and create pathways for inclusion and resilience.
So the key message I think I'd like to give today is durable reintegration is more viable within a joint UN framework and to be implemented in districts, municipalities, and neighborhoods with funding mechanisms such as the SDFA enabling a coherent package rather than fragmented sectoral initiatives.
I stop here and looking forward to the Q&A session.
Thank you very much.
Okay.
Can we go back to the presentation? Thanks a lot, Dole.
I understand that our colleagues who are online cannot hear us, but I will actually send her my greetings and I'll also thank her in the chat for the contribution.
I think Del mentioned some really interesting points about those two projects, but also about how as a UN, as a joint UN, we think displacement can be well, not solved, but they can be support to people in vulnerable situations.
She did specifically mention that for complex situations, you need integrated approaches.
This is why I think it's really good for me to see that in this project, the different UN agencies supporting bring different expertise and also because for those cross sectoral approaches, you need urban planning, spatial planning as a basis, but then you need sectoral responses as well.
But through the urban planning, they have to go hand in hand.
So now that we've heard from our colleagues from UNDP, let me hand over first to our colleague, Jose from UNHCR, because all of the four agencies, they come in with different perspectives and with different expertise.
Over to you, Jose, please.
Excellent.
Thank you very much.
During yesterday's main meeting, there was a lot of speakers.
Mentioned about behind the statistic there are people.
Here is a picture of one of these people from Afghanistan who is very glad to have an identity in my country.
That's what he said.
This is Mohibula.
It's important to understand that with our identity, with our legal document, you cannot access health.
You cannot take the children's and go to school.
Basic things like that that sometimes we give it for granted, it's important to understand that is key for durable solution.
If we go to the next testimony or the next colleague is Junos.
Junos is the headmaster of a school in Bamian and here we can see how the school that has been built, which basically provide adequate standard of living and basic services provide also hope and motivation to the children to continue being in Afghanistan in the near future.
I think the key here is also hope, which we hear quite a lot when we talk to the returnees, the Afghan returnees who are coming back because without hope, it's really difficult to build a community and it's very difficult to build a country.
And the same Mac Bush Madgul which is the next colleague or the next.
As you can see it is part of the housing.
Housing is another of the things that we do as part of the SDFA project which UNHR, IOM and other agencies are doing.
Janus is an Afghan benefiting from the shelter program and also mentioned the word hope.
I hope for a good future in the village and we can live peacefully.
No.
Lastly, there is another one from Mid Gul.
Mid Gul is about livelihood, it's about making an income because we have to make durable solution also sustainable.
If we are not able to allow the families to get an income and they continue dependent of humanitarian aid in this case, it is very likely that we will not break the cycle of displacements and these people will continue moving in the near future.
The same happened with Fatima, which is the next slide.
And Fatima is also part of the livelihood project, and she can basically mention how through the income that she's receiving, she can support and earn money for their family.
So these are just four testimonies that we wanted to bring to you, just to understand also that yes, indeed, behind the 6 million people that it has arrived since 2023 to now, there are also successful stories like the one from Fatima, Junus and others.
But unfortunately, There are 6 million people.
That's a lot of people to absorb in a country that also has some structural challenges.
So without the support of different agencies and donors, I would say basically it's nearly impossible to achieve it.
That's the whole purpose of this project funded by the SDFA that was talking about.
It's about bringing the expertise of different communities.
And different agencies to provide a certain level of integration to the people.
Because when we look now into the criteria for durable solution, we talk about durable solutions.
Some people might ask what it is.
But basically, when we talk about the Interagency Standing Committee framework for durable solution for IDPs, we talk about eight main criteria to achieve the durable solution.
Safety and security is one of them.
Adequate standard of living, access to livelihood, restoration of housing, land, and property, access to documentation, family reunification, participation in public affairs, and access to efficient remedies and justice.
I have the feeling that no humanitarian agency will be able to achieve these eight different criteria.
Why we are sitting here together to try to try to achieve this durable solution at different agencies and working with different national and international NGOs working together to be able to achieve the durable solution.
Because as I said at the beginning, If we build a shelter but there is no water access nearby, or if we build a shelter but the families are not able to go to health education or educate the children, it is very likely that the cycle of displacement will continue and that these people will continue moving in one year, two years time or maybe in three months time.
That's why it's important that.
It's important also to remember that Most of the people who are coming back to Afghanistan, the 6 million people we were saying are forced returnees.
There are people who are being pushed to move back to Afghanistan.
It's important to remark that because that means that the probability of not breaking the cycle of displacement is much higher.
The fact that we have to contribute better or it's even more important.
Just to conclude, I'd like to mention yesterday one of the speakers, the president of Kenya, was mentioning a success story about three main components.
But he was mentioning about land, and how Kenya in this case, was making public land free.
This is a key issue in Afghanistan as well.
How can we make land available for the 6 million people arriving? It's important and it's not easy.
6 million, 12% of the population is quite a lot.
No.
The second issue that they were saying the president was saying is construction costs, how we can standardize, how we can make economy of scale, and talk to different private sector, construction companies, et cetera, to make sure that we can provide a better shelters and better infrastructure cheaper.
This is obviously something that we are doing together.
We have different programs, even cash based intervention or in kind shelters or repair shelters that we are doing together in the area based approach that we are working.
And the third component that he was mentioning and perhaps the most important was the financing mechanism.
Here we have one mechanism, which is the SDFA but here's the challenge.
It is not enough.
It is not enough for 6 million people that are arriving together.
What we need as humanitarian agencies and those working also in the human basic needs services, it's additional funding to be able to contribute for the people of Afghanistan to reintegrate them or integrate them into the current areas where they are working.
Let me stop there and Thanks, Jose.
Can you hear me? Yeah.
I think something that you've actually mentioned which is key also, and that's the availability of land.
Of course, the government of Afghanistan, the authorities have played a huge role in this and continue to do so.
I think that also has to be acknowledged.
You already mentioned that there are many different stakeholders in such a displacement crisis who have to work together.
And the authorities in Afghanistan are playing an important role also by the provision of land, which is a first step to foster reintegration of people.
And also, you also mentioned, which I think is a very good point, the role of investments from the private sector, which actually goes together with also creating livelihood opportunities and of course, the construction.
That is something where there needs to be a cooperation, specifically also in Afghanistan between the funds that come from the outside, which is through a donor based approach, the funds which are available in the country, but then also an acknowledgment that people the moment they are starting to settle will start constructuring for themselves, and our role can also then be to support and make sure that their housing and shelter is actually more sustainable, is safer than anything they might be able to fund through their own means.
Maybe speaking about shelter and settlements, Cardina, let me hand over to you.
Thanks, Stephanie.
I'm going to take us maybe to a macro level.
We spoke about the stories of Maida or Fatima and the 6 million people returning in Afghanistan, but I wonder if we can take a look at what are the global displacement numbers today and how can we tackle that problem? I just want to ask the audience, does anyone know how many people are internally displaced in 2025? 8,080 million, 120 forcibly displaced.
Overall, 80 million internally displaced.
How do we tackle that challenge? How do we go from the story of Maida or Fatima and move that to a global level where we can actually make a huge change? So obviously, as we heard today, not one agency can do it alone, not four agencies can do it alone.
Not one municipality or one country dealing with those challenges can do that alone.
So what we need is really a global framework, a global push.
And over the last couple of years, we've seen very strong foundations being laid by the action agenda, which was an effort to mobilize states, to develop policies and strategies to address the issue of displacement within their boundaries, and to try and find those durable solutions.
So, um, Something that I think is important for me to highlight from the perspective of IOM, and I think that we all see it in that way is that the approach to achieving durable solutions It's a process.
Meeting those eight criterias that Jose talked about earlier, is not something that happens from one day to the next.
It's not something that we can say once people return, when people resettle, we're done.
This is a very long pathway.
I think for us what is important, what these projects that we talked about today illustrate is that it is a long process.
It is a pathway where people hopefully begin and move towards creating stronger outcomes.
And But really the starting point for us is that they need to be in the location where they want to be, where they want to settle, where they feel that they can rebuild their lives and rebuild those connections and access those services that they need.
That for us is a very starting point.
For There are a few critical areas for IOM that I'd like to talk about today.
One is understanding the dynamics of mobility and understanding intentions.
For us having all that data to know where people are, what are the conditions? Where do they want to go? What are their intentions is incredibly important.
It's not just data for data sake, is data to inform the way that we work.
I understand through this projects like the ones we talked about today, it's about understanding what people need, what people want, and how communities want to create that environment for resilience building.
We're seeing this importance of data coming through in many other countries as well.
Colombia this week, for example, the country where I come from, one of the largest and longer lasting displacement crisis, just launched a integrated data initiative to really understand what are people's needs and intentions at a national level and translate that into local actions.
The second area is working as we saw today on whole of community approaches, not just looking at what this one person needs, but looking at what communities as a whole required.
That means working with people that have returned, people that are still displaced within those communities, and people that are never moved, and those who are hosting displaced populations.
So looking at the entire settlement level and understanding what are the common priorities.
At the end of the day, when we go back to what people need, we see a pattern of the basic housing, land security, understanding that they won't be evicted from their place where they're living, having access to education, having access to housing and having access to livelihoods and all of those are connected.
You cannot have one without the other.
When we work at the area level, it creates that opportunity for unlocking the potential of those communities to be more resilient.
And I think last year took a little bit of what it means to have this integrated programming.
It's more than co location.
It's more than working in the same area.
It's really working together to build on each other's outcome.
How do we go from targeting, from providing people with multiple services, multiple layers of services to build that resilience.
I'll touch at the end just on the importance of this being locally led.
Um, one of the key achievements over the last few years is creating these nationally owned and nationally led durable solution strategies across many countries and that speaks to the reality that they need to be rooted in national approaches and local policies.
I think beyond the work that we can do as UN, beyond the delivery of the projects like this is the work that we can do to influence and shape the policies that are going to not only resolve displacement, but prevent displacement in the long term.
I'll stop here.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for making those points.
I think this is actually what both the PIDAT project and also the WADAT project are about.
This not only integrated, but really this joint programming where it becomes very clear how the areas of expertise of one agency is complemented through the approach and the expertise from the other agency.
I think as Del already also mentioned, the SDFA as a donor plays a crucial role because it is through the support, of course, financially, but also through the will to focus and bring our agencies together.
So Before I hand over to Ron to you, let me also explain briefly with some pictures like what your habitats approach and contribution to those projects, but also the approach overall is.
Okay.
So you've already heard that many of the returnineee settle in urban areas and because many of them are vulnerable, they do settle in areas which are not planned, which are underserved, and which are informal.
That brings a different set.
It brings together a lot of different challenges for the people who settle there.
Also, not only how you can see, for example, the absence of water and sanitation systems brings a health dimension.
You already mentioned the tenure rights for people.
If people settle in unplanned informal areas, they are at risk of evictions, which also means they are not really ready to invest into their housing solutions by themselves.
That is something which is very important.
Also, you already mentioned the connectivity.
If land made available or also if settlements are in areas far away from job opportunities, people will either become dependent on humanitarian aid or as this is decreasing worldwide, we need to strengthen the resilience.
We need to strengthen the resilience and the self reliance of people through livelihood opportunities, but and that is something that this picture for me also signifies, we have to strengthen the settlements for climate disaster resilience.
Because in Afghanistan specifically, which is one of the top ten countries regarding climate change, in an area like this, you might have drought on the one side, the access to water might be endangered, but you might also have from one day to the other flash floods.
If there's no investments in settlements, resilience in drainage and the few who were here on Sunday, also got an impression, what happens even in very developed countries, in very developed cities.
If drainage and climate resilience is maybe not up to scale to the weather events that the entire world is constantly facing.
Improving living environments is actually the first step for durable reintegration because if people have to worry all day, every day that the roofs of the houses for the families will fall down, then they might also not have the brain spacea to go and do livelihoods to actually look for jobs, to create economic opportunities.
If you're at constant risk that your assets are being washed away, then you're also not really aiming to invest further.
Human habitat is known in Afghanistan for its participatory approaches, and that means that the approach is really to listen to the people in the places where they live, where they have settled because the local communities, but also those who are displaced in those areas, they bring the expertise where they are at risk.
Our approach for community driven participatory hazard assessment gives people where they live the opportunity to actually flag to us Where do they see risks? Where do they feel unsafe in public space? Where when flash floods are coming are assets being swept away? For example, where do they feel at risk, specifically women and girls when they try to assess water points? Through a spatial planning approach, we're mapping those risks together with the communities, but we're also including them into what is actually our programming, what our response is? Because what is true for one neighborhood might not be true for the next neighborhood because people have different needs, but also there are different hazards and risks.
The housing situation, as you might have gathered also from the video, is a huge challenge, and that includes also the access to wash services, so water and sanitation, and so giving people the opportunity either, and that is other agencies and us were complementing each other, either helping them to build their own house or where they already have a house to make sure that this housing is more adequate through shelter repairs, through providing them a roof, through making sure that walls are stabilized also because Afghanistan is facing a huge earthquake risk, of course.
The access to basic services is something which is very important because it impacts the health of people and with that also their ability to generate livelihoods to have an income.
But also, of course, the lives of children depend on the health issues that they might be struggling.
In addition to water and sanitation projects, what we're also trying to do is to create spaces where when people access water, they can also have a moment together and where they still feel protected, and that is the picture on the right bottom.
Climate resilience was also already mentioned because, as you can see on the left, if there's a flash flood in an informal area where also the materials used by the local people and by the displaced people is maybe not adequate, then assets are being washed away and people who are already in vulnerable situations might have to start again and again and again.
So there's a lot of things you can actually do also to improve climate resilience based on a community based approach, but plus also by providing community infrastructure, which is the picture in the middle.
Or you can also protect entire settlements through larger scale disaster resilience projects like, for example, flood mitigation walls or similar.
We have the long term livelihood opportunities where skill development is needed, but you also sometimes have community based interventions where you just need people to make sure drainage that already exists is actually be usable.
That is where we use also the cash for work.
But we also have a lot of programs where the communities through the participatory approaches, where they engage because they own their neighborhood.
They are responsible for their neighborhood and it is included in capacity building that they also know they have to protect the assets that have been given.
Before we go to questions and answers, let me find a picture which is nice enough so we can actually maybe this one.
Let me also we just spoke about disaster resilience, and this is, I think, Ron, where your expertise specifically comes in.
In settlements, also those which have grown rapidly because of population increase, what are areas which need strong considerations regarding climate change and disaster risk reduction? Thank you very much, Stephanie.
First, let me say that I'm delighted to represent UNDP in what is a very important discourse on so many different levels.
I think one of the biggest challenges we're grappling with is the current environment where we as UN system actors, we have to integrate more.
I think this is a prime example of what is the positive dividend of institutions working together.
I'm really happy to see and to be a part of the conversation.
But I think before I go to the specifics of your question and pulling a little bit on Doyle's thread said earlier in her presentation and also our colleagues who spoke before, including yourself, this whole idea of ensuring that we prevent future displacement.
One of the things we have to probably do is shift a little bit some of the framing of our language.
We talk about climate resilience and we talk about crisis resilience.
What we're really trying to do is to achieve resilient development, to make development resilient in the face of shocks.
In this case, when we look at the context of Afghanistan, I mean, it's in the context of all vulnerable societies, but Afghanistan, as you outlined in your presentation, really presses us more to look at resilient human development.
Resilient human development as individuals are seeking to reintegrate, what has come across in the exchanges in the conversation and in UNDP's role is this idea of how do we ensure that we can reduce the levels of exposure and vulnerability of those who are instituting the communities but who are also will face potentially increasing vulnerabilities and exposure if reintegration is not done well? I think this is the value proposition that UNDP also brings to the, the team of actors operating in this space.
I think we bring the ability to bring this risk lens and what I would call a comprehensive risk management approach to this issue.
We flag climate because it is essentially the flavor of the month, but Afghanistan is also susceptible to seismic events.
There was an earthquake in 2025 in August.
And so if we're also not taking into consideration the reintegration approach and the housing sector, with a lens on how do we ensure that it is also resilient against a seismic, issues as well as the climate issues and heat, and we're also going to be rebuilding vulnerabilities.
So in UNDP's context, we do acknowledge and appreciate the need for ensuring that people can return, can be reintegrated, and we can provide the necessary support system that ensures their cohesion, we also have to continue to act to ensure that we are reducing those root causes and drivers that will lead to future displacement.
And so as we implement the project, and I won't go over all territory, I think the colleagues and yourself, Stephanie, quite rightly, spoke to a lot of the risk reduction interventions that are being put in place under the projects that are rolling out in Afghanistan.
Um, UNDP is firmly supporting and behind that.
What is good to see is that there is an integration of this risk lens in UN habitats approaches, in IOM's approaches, and in UNCR approaches.
I think this is one of the things we are trying to do.
We're trying to bring the risk sensitive lens to our development approaches.
This is about recovering from past crisis, and recovery is an opportunity to advance a development approach.
And so in these high return areas, as presented by the case studies in Afghanistan, what we really are trying to do is to ensure that we are addressing some of those key drivers of vulnerability in the project.
The specifically in terms of UNDP on disastrous reduction and preparedness and resilient recovery, Um, we see that the climate issues, the geismic issues, and the conflict related issues are all interconnected.
They are converging and it is creating one would say, a wicked problem, a context for a wicked problem.
How do we manage the convergence of these issues in the context of communities that are themselves, grappling with perhaps social cohesion issues, sustainable livelihood issues.
And now we're trying to ensure that we're providing opportunities for those who are returning and displaced.
We are promoting a risk informed urban development approach, and this means ensuring that we are not only using data for better decision intelligence, but we're connecting this across the stream of putting people at the center, connecting it to sustainable finance opportunities, looking at issues around good governance, all which are required.
If you are really going to be able to drive a a risk informed development agenda, infrastructure resilience is going to be critical, so that they can withstand to provide services for those who are living in many of these communities and you've heard of at least four communities from, from others, Kunduz, Heat, Farah, and Baghlad, if I'm pronouncing it correctly.
We need to ensure that as we look to resettle the infrastructure that is being put in place, both in terms of roads and other public assets and communal assets, as well as housing is being made to be resilient to these shocks.
The triple dividend that I think emerges from these engagements, one, reduce future disaster losses, ensures that there is immediate and sustainable jobs that are potentially being created, and income improvements for those who are already living there, but also those who are returning, and of course, improve connectivity and access to services, markets, and infrastructure.
And most importantly, one has to bear in mind that there are natural processes which we have no control over.
These we call them the hazards that are sensitive to climate and geophysical hazards.
We also have to ensure that we're investing in preparedness, state level, community level, providing necessary early warning systems to ensure that people can get the message and can act quickly and to identify the safe routes to secure themselves and their livelihoods.
I want to make one last comment because I think the initiative is really speaking to how we need to go forward in an era of shrinking resources.
I think it's important that we point it out.
I mean, we are seeing that resources, we're in a resource constrained environment.
A lot of resources don't abound.
So the way to make these limited resources more effective and to deliver multiple dividends is one, to really ensure that we are building these risk reduction ethos in everything we do, that we are also connecting the value proposition that each of the organizations bring to the table in a meaningful way to ensure that there is significant impact.
So I want to stop there, but just to say that, you know, UNDP remains committed to the partnership and to help to bring this risk informed lens, to help to bring this resilient recovery approach, to see opportunities post crisis as an avenue for delivering on risk sensitive human development.
Thank you.
Thanks a lot.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ron.
And I mean, first, maybe let's give a strong round applaud for all speakers.
Um, there are some points which I think keep coming up apart from the different competences that the different agencies bring to the context.
But also, of course, if you don't have this risk sensitive lens, all of your efforts might actually just be for nothing because they're at risk of being swamped away.
The importance of climate change, but also, of course, disaster resilience, which in Afghanistan is also for the housing sector.
We've had more than 2000 families being impacted by the earthquake where just houses just crumbled.
That is really a very important point you're making.
But then also I think something that came up through those discussions is actually that it needs a humanitarian support first entry point.
But then specifically in a context like Afghanistan, it also needs longer term approaches, basic human needs, how it's called in Afghanistan, but also, of course, towards a development and that is on the one hand for the people, but also and that is important in urban areas towards establishing systems that can work in the longer term.
And so I have two questions myself to the panelists, and then we would like to hand over also to different voices from the audience.
I can see our colleague, Mota from the World Vision, I would like to give you the floor as well.
But also we hope that the audience has some questions that we can maybe bring in.
But maybe one question because I think in this one UN session, which for me is more than one plus one plus one plus one, it's actually the joint thinking and the joint programming.
And also, I would like to hear maybe just a sentence from each of the panelists about How do you see your role in actually fostering these approaches from humanitarian towards development activities? Because I think that is something that in Afghanistan is specifically important.
Maybe we can just do a loop starting again with you, Carolina, then Jose, and then Ron.
Thanks, Stephanie.
I think we've been speaking about the nexus for many years and we talked about it as a continuum, then we talked about it as a continuum.
We're trying still to figure out how do we make that work.
And I think that in Afghanistan, you have very good examples of how all of these interventions have to be done in parallel, how every single person that returns or who is displaced have needs which are immediate, long term, midterm, and so we cannot wait to bring all the population out of humanitarian needs into recovery, into development.
We need to be doing this all at the same time.
So it's more of an issue for me now of converging and being able to have the interventions like the ones we talked about today where we are addressing all of those needs in parallel and together.
Thanks a lot.
P.
Yes, I will echo what you just said, working in parallel in this continuous that we say, what normally happen in Afghanistan and we have seen through photos, people arrive with nothing.
When they arrive with nothing, they need the humanitarian needs and we are providing that.
Unfortunately, the more humanitarian needs that we provide, the less funding we have for the human basic needs of development.
How do we make it faster? We'll save humanitarian funding that can be allocated for the root causes of displacement and the root causes for integration.
I think for me the importance of again back to this parallel approach that we cannot wait and ensure that we already have a plan from the humanitarian point of view to be the first mile of development, but from the development point of view to be also like the last mile of humanitarian just to ensure that we are building the bridges from both sides and not only from one.
Thank you.
I think that's a very important question.
How do I frame it? I think as UNDP, we are We don't see development as a stop point.
It's continuous.
We talk about first and last mile.
As a development actor, we're there in the first mile in blue skies times, in gray skies time.
Our job is to really understand what are the fundamental, I would say fractures in achieving sustainable human development.
And understanding that then allows us to begin to implement programs that are trying to address those points of failure, as we call them root causes drivers.
We know that pursuit of development produces risks.
So we're really acting to address that sort of risk sensitive development approach.
But I think most importantly, UNDP is one of the actors on scene right in the aftermath of any crisis.
And our job is not to replicate or duplicate the humanitarian intervention.
But to roll our sleeves up and to really look at those points of failure that led to the displacement that led to the crisis in the first place and to begin to do that longer term planning.
The spotlight is going to be on the humanitarians.
That's okay.
But someone needs to be in the engine room working on those fundamental issues, and that's where I see UNDP as a critical partner working with IOM, with UNHCR, with UN habitat and others, looking at the broader planning and landscape that is seeking to move people from fragile or crisis affected context, connecting that to our medium to long term financing, development financing and processes.
Incidentally, leveraging some of our blue skies projects as early investments into that particular process.
I see UNDP in that context.
Thank you very much.
Thanks, Ron.
For you in habitat, we had for a long time, for those who saw it, this picture of the woman sitting in front of her house.
For me to be very honest, housing, as we're at the World Urban Forum with the theme of housing at the center and housing the world, is one of those elements where I can see a real nexus approach.
For me, it's actually quite seamless because, for example, if you're in a humanitarian situation, the first thing is actually what you need is shelter.
But then when you are starting to integrate, you actually need a bit more than shelter, you need adequate housing, and then for an even longer term and a stronger integration, you need tenure rights.
Because if you don't have those tenure rights, if you don't know that you won't be displaced again, you will actually not start investing in the house or the shelter that you've started building.
For me, housing is actually one of those elements where you can actually see how over time there is this real continuity needed in approaches, starting from a shelter to a more durable shelter, to then housing situation which might have access to basic services as well, which is protected Um, but then also through the tenure rs, through understanding that you're not at risk of being displaced again.
This is when you start to settle.
This is when you start feeling safe, and this is when you have the head free to also really engage with others.
For me, housing is actually really a very good entry point for for making this humanitarian development nexus very tangible for everybody because I think everybody can understand the importance of housing.
Maybe, and if we go to the next slide, I don't know if I still have control, Yes.
This is a part where we would really like to hear from some of you some statements from the audience.
As I already mentioned, I'd love to give the floor to you if you want to come and speak up, our colleagues from World Vision in Afghanistan to make a very short contribution, we'd be happy to give you the floor.
And then we're also happy to have questions from the room so that the panelists can also answer.
I don't know if we have a microphone so that you can maybe Please start with a proper introduction so that people.
Thank you very much, Stephanie, and respected panelists member for initiating this very important conversation around advancing durable solution and reintegration of returnees in Afghanistan.
My name is Motazahayri, and I work with World Vision Afghanistan as country mill manager.
I think the findings of our very recent studies is very much aligned with what we are discussing.
We have partnered with Somelhll, which is a local cobble based research firm and undertaking a study called remittance loss and the cost of deportation.
We believe that and it has been a very timely study because it was conducted during that peak of deportation of Afghans from Iran.
So what we wanted to look at the through this research was we wanted to look at the impact of remittance loss on remittance dependent household, you know, remittance is the money sent by the immigrants, you know, to their families back home.
And for many Afghans, remittance is not an extra source of income.
It's in fact the main source of income for, you know, basic needs like water, education, health and protection.
So we looked at, you know, we looked at the impact of remittance loss on the remittance dependent household at three level.
We looked at its impact at the household level, and then its impact at the community level, and then its impact at the system and city level.
So at the household level, our reports and statistic shows quite staggering findings and it's alarming.
You know, 97% of our participants reported borrowing money for basic needs like water, education and health.
82% reported experiencing food insecurity and adopting negative coping strategies like delaying health care services, reducing meal.
And 65% of our survey participants reported relying on remittances for more than 65% of their total income.
22% reported withdrawing their children from schools with boys moving to hazardous labor jobs and with girls at the risk of being dropped out of school.
That's what happens.
That's the impact of remittance loss at the household level.
You go to at the community level, and then at the system level, it doesn't stop there at the housing level.
It goes quickly to the community, and then it goes to the city and system level.
The key message in our report is that early stabilization is very important.
Without early stabilization, that short term problem, economic issue, remittance loss can turn into a very big and long term problem like food insecurity, dropout, child marriage, child protection risk.
So our report also provides with, you know, recommendations, actionable recommendation, both at the policy level and, you know, at the program at the implementation level.
So at the implementation level, I think to just mention a few, we recommend child centered cash plus programming, you know, you know, as an immediate action, followed by, you know, reintegration efforts and also at the, you know, school retention and, you know, integrated with psychosocial support and community based monitoring.
Even in the long term, we also recommend doing community sort of youth livelihood development projects because many youths that are coming from abroad, from Iran forestance bring, you know, good skills and knowledge and expertise.
So I believe with the right support, they can contribute to, you know, to a stronger and more resilient cities and communities back to you.
No, thank you very much.
Thank you for bringing this important point because we've heard a lot about also providing people, let's say, with the right skill sets.
But I think the point you've actually made very clear and that is just to also give the audience a bit of a context.
Many Afghans in the last decades have actually left Afghanistan in order to have livelihoods to send money home back to their families.
Now with this massive return crisis, and I think that is an important point, not only as you mentioned, Ron, that the external resources, those coming in from the international communities in Afghanistan, they've reduced by 40% in the last year, which means 40% less funding coming to support the Afghan people from the outside.
Also the, let's say, social network that Afghan families have and which are being supported through their families living abroad has reduced dramatically because the people who have actually made money in the other countries are now being are now returning as well, and job opportunities in Afghanistan at the moment are still relatively low.
I think there's a huge effort to make sure that there's investment in private sector so that also you can have income opportunities.
But clearly that is a really important point that you've made that another source of funding for Afghan families has simply broken away through those massive returns.
Let me see if there are any sort of questions.
Please, let's start on this side and then let's see if there are other people who would like to answer the question.
Hello I'm Navid Bahar, a journalist from Aran News Television in Afghanistan.
My question is to Unit CRS to what extent has the organization finding shortage created challenge for providing assistance to Afghan refugees? Thanks.
So the question is about the challenges of UNHCR for providing assistance.
I think there are two main challenge.
The first one is the magnitude of the return and also we have to add the people that are displaced internally in the country because of conflict induced IDPs, but also because of natural disaster.
The magnitude is very big, and this is one of the main challenge.
Through the area based approach that we are having here, we can cover, unfortunately, certain areas, certain province, but not the whole country.
So but the good news is that we are able to continue replicating that.
And when I say we is not only UNHCR, it's all colleagues that we are here, all agencies that we are here.
So we are able to replicate it.
Now, the second challenge is unfortunately the financial constraints that we all have to be able to replicate these projects and approaches and be able to provide assistance to many other Afghan returnees and Afghans displaced that needed.
Okay.
We take a second question, a third question because we've only got 8 minutes left and I promised to the next session that we will finish on time.
Thank you.
Please over.
We had a good conversation and it's Mohamadshir Sultani from Thrones.
My question is more related to Mr.
António from UNAR.
We are talking about the safe reintegration of millions of migrants who are coming from neighboring country to Afghanistan.
So While we have a major reduction in humanitarian aids for Afghanistan, how do you think that it may be effects on this safe integration of these migrants to the Afghanistan community while we have a major reduction in humanitarian aids and what should be done in this moment to overcome these challenges in Afghanistan? I just want to have a short comment if you think.
Yeah.
Thank you very much.
We are coming back to the same unfortunately that is the financial constraints that we are having.
However, and this is part of the Global Compact on refugees or the global Compat on migration.
What we are trying to see and to do is how we can get many more alliances like this one to be able to provide assistance is needed.
What we are also trying to do is how we can be more cost effective.
Whenever there are funding constraints, how we can be more effective in our interventions, to be able to provide assistance or to have a bigger impact for the Afghan communities.
This is what we are trying to do.
Unfortunately, unfortunately, it's about solidarity of other countries of private sectors, of academia, of different agencies, and governments to help and work together to be able to achieve the impact that we are trying to achieve and replicate the projects like the one from SDFA in many different provinces and districts in Afghanistan.
Maybe let me just also add to this question because I'm coming in more with, let's say development approach to this now.
I think one of the entry points that we as an agency use is actually to say, how can we enable people to not depend on aid? That is, I think one of the main questions.
The question is not, how do we get more aid from the outside for the people, but the question is, what do we need to do so that the people don't need this aid? I think this is maybe I'm sorry to say a bit of a difference between the more development oriented and also the humanitarian approach in some places.
But for me, that is one of the really crucial questions we have to answer not only in Afghanistan but actually elsewhere in the world as well.
Climate change has been mentioned so that people or climate resilience as well as hazard resilience so that people actually, when they invest in something, it doesn't break down.
When they have skill sets, they can actually apply them in different jobs.
We can foster entrepreneurship.
We can also make sure that they have adequate living conditions.
I think that needs not only one stakeholder, but let me get to the point that it really needs a lot of different stakeholders who need to pull on the same direction and empower people so that they have the ability to actually help themselves.
I think that is one of the things that we really want to highlight also through an interagency approach.
Any other questions? I have a minute, I'll hand over to you and then we have a two second video to resume this session for you.
Yes.
Thank you so much, Stephanie, and panelists.
My name is Eric from UN Habitat.
Just one quick question.
Having worked in the field, especially in the operational level in displacement settings in the Horn of Africa, One of the challenges I've seen in slowing down the transition to durable and development oriented solutions is the fragmented nature of the interventions that agencies, especially UN and INGO partners operate.
It's not a question of goodwill.
Most of the times it's about the budgetary cycles because maybe government cycles are a bit cyclic unpredictable, but then agencies funding is mostly unpredictable and doesn't come at the same time hindering the implementation of different programs.
But is there a model or a structure that this could be envisaged or look at that promotes different agencies working on long term and bigger interventions and that limit us from having to do fragmented, short term or emergency solutions.
Thank you.
To be very honest, one of my answers, and then I'll hand it over to you, Carolina as well, is that of course in displacement situations, the duty bearer is usually the government.
I think you habitat is implemented in many countries where there have been displacement waves, where there have been this, they have empowered municipal governments to actually include elements that people need for resilience into their municipal budgets because any money that comes from the outside is either conditional or it will come for a specific timeline or on a specific sector.
In the end, the responsibility for me is really, and I think Carolina, I'm going to hand over to you because you mentioned that usually there are nationally led durable solutions or reintegration strategies, and those also need to have the funding, not only counting on what comes from the outside, but also intrinsically.
Maybe let me hand over to you also, Carolina, for that.
Thanks.
I won't pretend that I have the answer to that question, but I just want to maybe talk a little bit about what the approach that we talked about today can bring.
This is not exclusive to Afghanistan.
We're seeing this being implemented in other countries, places like Somalia, places like South Sudan, where we have a realized that it is important that we work more closely together and a very brief example of our work in Pakistan, dealing with flood related displacement.
When we worked at a single sector and when we work in a more integrated way.
With the same amount of money that we can build one shelter in a village in Pakistan, we can actually mobilize community to do a whole of community approach and working together on infrastructure or improvement of houses.
And what we're seeing is that if we work in that way, the return on investment is a lot higher.
We have interventions in Pakistan where we are not working on livelihoods at all.
But just by working through this whole of community approach, we're seeing that people are better off because the infrastructure improves, because access to water improves, because they are able to restart their livelihood opportunities on their own because they have access to the services that they require.
I think that is a question of um as Ron was saying earlier, what are the things that gives you dividends? Housing gives you dividends.
Housing gives you the ability to study, the ability to cook, the ability to wash, the ability to work that needs to be at the center of what we do.
In many other countries, we're seeing a very similar push for this approach where we are looking at the whole of community level, where we are mobilizing people to identify what they need, what they want, and to invest their own resources as well in the improvements in the settlements where they live.
Thank you.
I would say I spare you the video.
We've just reached our end of the session, and thank you for coming.
Thanks for listening in to those who are online and wishing you all a good rest of the day and hope to see you soon.
Thank.