In Practice Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement Janet Heisey, Inés Arévalo Sánchez, and Alexi Bernagros 4 © 2022 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development | The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photo: Curt Carnemark | World Bank Volume 4 June 15, 2022 In Practice Contents Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................. i About the In Practice Series............................................................................................................ ii Definitions.................................................................................................................................................... iii Abbreviations............................................................................................................................................. v Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1 Forced Displacement: Understanding the Context................................................... 3 Effects of forced displacement on host communities ............................................................ 5 Economic inclusion programs in displacement contexts...................................................... 6 Key Issues Faced by Forcibly Displaced People ......................................................... 11 Policy and legal ................................................................................................................................ 11 Partnerships and institutions ....................................................................................................... 13 Local economies................................................................................................................................ 14 Individuals and households ........................................................................................................... 16 Program Design in Contexts of Forced Displacement............................................ 19 Tailoring program design to needs.............................................................................................. 19 Customizing a package of support............................................................................................... 22 Delivering Economic Inclusion Programs in Contexts of Forced Displacement ....................................................................... 29 Institutional arrangements for program delivery ................................................................... 29 Targeting and selecting beneficiaries.......................................................................................... 31 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................. 35 Appendixes.......................................................................................................................................... 37 Appendix A: Understanding Target Groups and their Constraints .................................. 38 Appendix B: Understanding Program Settings and their Constraints.............................. 41 Appendix C: Active Displacement-Context Economic Inclusion Programs Mapped Globally........................................................................................ 43 Notes......................................................................................................................................................... 49 References............................................................................................................................................. 52 Boxes Box 1.1 The impacts of economic inclusion ......................................................................................... 8 Box 2.1 Policy and legal constraints influencing program design.................................................. 12 Box 2.2 Partnership and institutional constraints influencing program design........................ 14 Box 2.3 Local economy constraints influencing program design.................................................... 15 Box 2.4 Individual and household constraints influencing program design .............................. 17 Figures Figure 1.2 Pathways to economic inclusion at scale: a framework................................................ 7 Figure 3.1 Program objectives of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs... 19 Figure 3.2 Number and types of program components of economic inclusion programs..... 25 Figure 3.3 Sequencing and duration of economic inclusion program components, by nondisplacement and displacement context.......................................................................................... 27 Figure 4.1 Economic inclusion programs integrated with existing government programs (overall and government-led), by displacement status ...................................................................... 30 Figure 4.2 Percentage of displacement-context economic inclusion programs serving groups of forcibly displaced people........................................................................................................... 32 Figure 4.3 Profile of people targeted by nondisplacement- and displacement-context economic inclusion programs .................................................................................................................... 32 Map Map 1.1 Government and nongovernment programs supporting displacement-affected populations .......................................................................................................... 7 Tables Table 1.1 examples of economic inclusion programs serving forcibly displaced people and their hosts.................................................................................................................................................. 10 Table 3.1 Key considerations and potential adaptations of core economic inclusion components in contexts of forced displacement.................................................................................. 22 Acknowledgments This note is the culmination of research and learning from interviews and events held over the past year. The authors benefited from discussions at the 2021 PEI Country Innovation Clinic on Economic Inclusion and Forced Displacement among Nizamettin Kağan Bayramoğlu, Turkish Employment Agency (İŞKUR/PES); Geoffrey Leparteleg, Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project, Kenya; Mairo Mandara, special adviser to the governor of Borno state, Nigeria; Bárbara Pereira dos Cravos, Ministry of Citizenship of Brazil; Daniel Iza, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Guatemala; Rita Larok, AVSI Foundation, Uganda; and World Bank colleagues Christian Bodewig, Thomas Bossuroy, Xavier Devictor, Margaret Grosh, and Melissa Johns. This effort also benefited from discussions during the 2022 Fragility Forum session “Advancing Economic inclusion for Forcibly Displaced People” featuring Babazanna Abdulkarim, Northeast (Nigeria) Multisectoral Crisis Recovery Project; Soraya Goga, World Bank; Robert Limlim, Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project, Uganda; and Jenny Swatton, Concern Worldwide. The authors also thank the following task team leaders at the World Bank who shared their experiences in one-on-one interviews: Maha Ahmed, Sabine Beddies, Paula Cerutti, Aïssata Coulibaly, Sirma Demir Seker, Siddharth Hari, Efsan Nas Ozen, Jade Ndiaye, Mirey Ovadiya, Ashutosh Raina, Matthew Stephens, Dario Zanardi, and Eric Zapatero. Moreover, this report is enriched by the data on economic inclusion programs in forced displacement submitted by the organizations listed in appendix C. Finally, the authors thank the peer reviewers whose input improved the note considerably: Line Astrom (UNHCR), Sarah Coll-Black (World Bank), and Kirsten Schuettler (World Bank). They thank their PEI colleagues Colin Andrews, who provided overall guidance, Puja Vasudeva Dutta for early input, and Hitoshi Chakma, Claudia Santamaria Ruiz, and Chantal Sirisena for their support. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  i About the In Practice Series The Partnership for Economic Inclusion introduces the In Practice series featuring accessible, practitioner-focused publications that highlight learning, good practice, and emerging innovations for scaling up economic inclusion programs. Guide to Navigation The In Practice series is interactive and provides built-in technical features to assist readers as they progress, including a navigation bar, progress bar, and the ability to jump to endnotes and back to the text throughout. Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Chapter navigation Progress bar Jump notes The navigation bar at the top of This bar orients readers to their Endnotes throughout the text are each page allows easy naviga- progress in each chapter and interlinked to allow easy naviga- tion with a simple click. through the document. tion from notes and the main text. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  ii Definitions Asylum Seeker An individual who has “sought international protection and whose claims for refugee status have not yet been determined.”1 When people flee their own country and seek sanctuary in another country, they apply for asylum—that is, the right to be recognized as a refugee and receive legal protection and material assistance. Not every asylum seeker will ultimately be recognized as a refugee, but an asylum seeker may not be sent back to their country of origin pending a final determination.2 Camp “Any purpose-built, planned, and managed location or spontaneous settlement where refugees are accommodated and receive assistance and services from government and humanitarian agencies. The defining characteristic of a camp . . . is some degree of limitation on the rights and freedoms of refugees, such as their ability to move freely, choose where to live, work or open a business, cultivate land or access protection and services” (UNHCR 2014). Economic Inclusion Program A bundle of coordinated multidimensional interventions that support individuals, households, and communities in their efforts to increase their incomes and assets. Economic inclusion programs therefore aim to facilitate the dual goals of strengthening both the resilience of and opportunities for individuals and households that are poor. These goals are met by strengthening community and local economy links. The term economic inclusion is sometimes used interchangeably with the term productive inclusion (Andrews et al. 2021). Forcibly Displaced People Refugees, asylum seekers, internally displaced people, Venezuelans displaced abroad, and returnees. Host Community The country of asylum and the local, regional, and national government social and eco- nomic structures within which refugees live. Urban refugees live within host communi- ties with or without legal status and recognition by the host community. In the context of refugee camps, the host community may encompass the camp, or it may simply neighbor the camp but interact with, or otherwise be affected by, the refugees residing in the camp (UNHCR 2011). For internally displaced people, the host is the city or com- munity that accommodates internally displaced people within the country of origin. Internally Displaced People (IDPs) Persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights, or natural or human-made disasters. They have not crossed an internationally recognized border.3 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  iii Migrant Persons who choose to move not because of a direct threat of persecution or death, but mainly to improve their lives by finding work or perhaps for education, family reunion, or other reasons. Unlike refugees who cannot safely return home, migrants face no such impediment to return. If they choose to return, they continue to receive the protection of their government (UNHCR 2016). Refugee A person who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence. A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.4 Returnee Returned IDPs: “IDPs who were beneficiaries of UNHCR’s protection and assistance activities and who returned to their areas of origin or habitual residence during the calendar year.”5 Returned refugees: “Former refugees who have returned to their country of origin, either spontaneously or in an organized fashion, but are yet to be fully integrated.”6 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  iv Abbreviations DRDIP Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FCV fragile, conflict, and violence G2R Graduating to Resilience IDP internally displaced person IGA income-generating activity IOM International Organization for Migration IPT interpersonal therapy IŞKUR Turkish Employment Agency L&J livelihoods and jobs MCRP Multisectoral Crisis Recovery Program (Nigeria) PEI Partnership for Economic Inclusion PFS/BNS Projet Filets Sociaux Burkin Naong Sa Ya (Burkina Faso) PRA participatory rural appraisal PWR poverty wealth ranking RCT randomized controlled trial RYSE Resilient Youth Socially and Economically Empowered (Jordan) SSN social safety net SuTP Syrians under Temporary Protection TMF Transforming My Future (Colombia) UN United Nations UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund URB Unified Registry of Beneficiaries (Nigeria) VSLA village savings and loan association WFP World Food Programme The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  v Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Introduction When people flee their homes to escape conflict, persecution, or humanitarian shocks, they often face significant challenges to their economic and personal well-being. At the end of 2021, 89.3 million people were classified as forcibly displaced due to persecution, conflict, violence, or human rights violations (UNHCR 2022). As the dynamics of poverty, food insecurity, climate change, conflict, and displacement grow increasingly interconnected and mutually reinforcing, more and more people are being driven to search for safety and security.7 Meanwhile, the COVID-19 pandemic has particularly in urban areas (World Bank further exacerbated this situation. The 2017a). Host governments often struggle World Bank predicts a 3.6 percent decline in to provide sufficient long-term support. global income per capita, which will result Host communities also face significant in the first increase in global poverty since challenges as markets, infrastructure, and 1998 (Dempster et al. 2020), bringing the services are stretched by the influx of arrivals. total number of new entrants into extreme Governments frequently struggle to respond poverty to up to 150 million (World Bank because they are uncertain how long displaced 2020b). Although the full impact of the populations will remain in a given location. pandemic on wider cross-border migration and displacement globally is not yet clear, In response, governments, humanitarian forcibly displaced people and stateless people organizations, and other institutions are have been among the hardest-hit groups. relying on economic inclusion programs as one strategy to support both forcibly Forcible displacement presents challenges displaced people and their hosts. These for those who have been displaced, programs, defined as a bundle of coordinated, the communities that host them, and multidimensional interventions to support governments that receive them. Forcibly individuals, households, and communities displaced people often have low standards in their efforts to increase their incomes of living and lack suitable livelihood and assets, are designed to respond to opportunities. They face numerous barriers to the multiple constraints faced by forcibly meeting their basic needs, including the health displaced people when integrating into and trauma-related vulnerabilities associated the economy and by their hosts. Emerging with being uprooted. They struggle to meet evidence suggests that a comprehensive suite their immediate expenses for basic needs, lack of interventions has a greater and more proper documentation and support networks, sustained impact on income, assets, and and face vulnerability to crime and violence, well-being than stand-alone interventions. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  1 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Many economic inclusion programs that This note examines the experience of aim to facilitate self-employment do so with economic inclusion programs that serve business capital to jump-start economic forcibly displaced people, including internally activity and provide training, coaching, and displaced people (IDPs), refugees, and access to finance (Andrews et al. 2021). their host communities. It also examines the emerging lessons learned in program Currently, about one-third of economic design and delivery based on new data inclusion programs identified through the on the footprint of economic inclusion Partnership for Economic Inclusion (PEI) programs and a review of evidence on Landscape Survey serve forcibly displaced forced displacement and economic inclusion people and their hosts.8 PEI recently updated programming.10 The first section explores the its Landscape Survey, which revealed that context within which these displacement- the number of economic inclusion programs context programs have emerged, and the serving forcibly displaced people and their second reviews the geographic footprint hosts has increased in the last three to five and key issues faced by forcibly displaced years and that many government programs people. The third section then explores in with economic inclusion interventions greater detail some key considerations when targeting forcibly displaced people are in designing economic inclusion programs an early stage of development—that is, in for forcibly displaced people and identifies either the planning or early implementation promising practices. The fourth section stage.9 Programs led by nongovernmental highlights considerations for program delivery organizations (NGOs) have been under together with promising practices. The way much longer and are contributing to fifth and final section offers conclusions. the knowledge base. Emerging experience from a rapidly growing pipeline of economic inclusion programs provides useful insights for adapting programs for forcibly displaced people and their hosts. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  2 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Forced Displacement: Understanding the Context Recent events have increased displacement around the globe, with 14.4 million people newly displaced within their countries in 2021 (UNHCR 2022) and an additional 5.1 million from the crisis in Ukraine by June 16, 2022.11 Of the 89.3 million forcibly displaced globally through 2021, over half (53.2 million) are IDPs and 27.1 million are refugees—that is, people who have crossed an international border to find safety in another country (figure 1.1). An additional 4.6 million displaced people populations. In such countries, government are in the process of seeking asylum. Many safety nets, local infrastructure, and even refugees find themselves in protracted natural resources are likely already strained, situations. In fact, on average, refugees live in and the influx of refugees and other displaced exile for 10 years, and the median duration is populations, who tend to concentrate in four years (Devictor and Do 2016). Refugees specific areas, often places an additional tend to have few prospects for finding a burden on these limited resources. solution for displacement because of shifting political landscapes and unending conflicts.12 Forcibly displaced people live in diverse settings, each with unique barriers and Most refugees live in low- and middle-income opportunities (figure 2.1). Many people countries close to their country of origin. equate displacement with refugee camps— Eighty-three percent of refugees are hosted that is, temporary facilities built to provide by developing countries. Nearly 10 million immediate protection and assistance to refugees are hosted by five countries alone, in meet basic needs. However, only about descending order: Turkey, Colombia, Uganda, 22 percent of the world’s overall refugee Pakistan, and Germany with smaller countries population, or about 6 million people, live often hosting a large number relative to in refugee camps.14 Camp-based refugees their populations. For example, one in eight often face restrictions on mobility, financial people in Lebanon are refugees, compared inclusion, economic opportunity, and with one in 23 in Turkey (UNHCR 2022).13 market access. However, increasingly governments and the United Nations High Hosting displaced populations often puts Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) economic, social, and financial pressures are pursuing policies that favor finding on the host countries, many of which are alternatives to camps (UNHCR 2014). already struggling to support their own The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  3 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Most forcibly displaced people, including and subjected to working in high-risk 60 percent of refugees and 80 percent of jobs. Forcibly displaced people living in IDPs, live in urban areas (UNHCR 2017). rural settlements or outside of cities and Although in cities displaced people can live towns frequently find that these settings autonomously and engage more readily in have fewer community and infrastructure livelihood opportunities, they are often more systems than urban settlements, but they vulnerable to exploitation and detention may offer more flexibility than camps.15 Figure 1.1: Recent trends in forced displacement a. Population in forced displacement by year and displaced group (millions) People forced to flee worldwide (2017—2022) 100M 75M IDPs Refugees under UNHCR’s mandate Refugees under UNRWA’s mandate 50M Venezuelans displaced abroad Asylum seekers 25M Latest available estimates 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 b. Distribution of forcibly displaced people, by displaced group (millions) Forcibly displaced 89.3 Million Internally displaced people (IDPs) 53.2 Refugees 27.1M Million Venezuelans displaced abroad 4.4M Asylum seekers 4.6M c. Main economies hosting refugee populations Refugees hosted in 9.9 Turkey Turkey 3.8 million 83% developed economies 3.7 million MILLION Colombia OF REFUGEES 27.1 4.6M Colombia REFUGEES ARE 1.7 million 1.8 million Uganda ARE HOSTED Million HOSTED Uganda IN 1.5 million 1.5 million IN DEVELOPING 22.5M 5 TOP HOST Pakistan Pakistan 1.5 million 1.4 million COUNTRIES Refugees hosted in COUNTRIES Germany Germany 1.3 million developing economies 1.2 million Turkey 3.8 million Source: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Figures at a Glance,” https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/ figures-at-a-glance.html. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  4 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement EFFECTS OF FORCED population subgroups are affected more DISPLACEMENT ON HOST than others. These factors include the host COMMUNITIES country’s income level, state capacity, and characteristics of its economy; the policies in A 2019 review of the evidence on the place for forcibly displaced people; and the economic impact of forced displacement characteristics of forcibly displaced people on host communities revealed that forced and the nature of their displacement. For displacement has a positive contribution on example, the negative effects on employment overall household well-being (between 45–54 and wages mostly have been felt by vulnerable percent of findings) and on employment and and low-skilled informal workers in middle- wages (between 12–20 percent of findings) income countries (Altındag, Bakis, and Rozo (Verme and Schuettler 2019). Meanwhile, 2020; Caruso, Canon, and Mueller 2010; host communities are affected negatively— Olivieri et al. 2020; Shamsuddin et al. 2021; via effects on household well-being, prices, Suzuki et al. 2019; Verme and Schuettler employment, and wages—in less than 20 2019). If the hosting country does not allow percent of examined cases, and negative refugees to work or does not recognize their effects tend to dissipate over time.16 skills certificates, refugees will resort to More recent studies in low- and middle- relying on informal and low-skilled labor income countries also show that large inflows opportunities and likely accepting lower of displaced people can have both positive wages than the locals. This situation, in turn, and negative socioeconomic effects on pushes informal, low-skilled local workers host countries. Positive economic impacts out of work and drives informal wages include more economic activity, such as down. Allowing refugees and other forcibly growth of markets (Graham and Miller displaced people to work, own businesses, 2021), firm-level output (Altındag, Bakis, and access critical services can lead to overall and Rozo 2020), economic growth (David positive effects on the local economy such et al. 2020), and local development (Zhou as through increases in firm creation and et al. 2022). Negative impacts include lower enterprise output and improved labor market employment or wages, or both, for host outcomes (Altındag, Bakis, and Rozo 2020; populations (Ayenew 2021; David et al. Clemens et al. 2018; Verme and Schuettler 2020; Olivieri et al. 2020; Pacheco 2019; 2019). Where countries have undertaken Shamsuddin et al. 2021; Suzuki et al. 2019); investments in, for example, improving lower consumption resulting from higher service provision and road infrastructure, prices (Ayenew 2021; Rozo and Sviatschi the negative effects have been neutralized 2020); worse access to infrastructure and (Aksoy and Tumen 2021). In lower-income services (Krishnan et al. 2020; World countries, international aid inflows have Bank 2020d); and worse overall economic contributed to overall positive effects (David activity and poverty (World Bank 2020g). et al. 2020; Verme and Schuettler 2019). Certain factors influence whether results are positive or negative and whether certain The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  5 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Although more research is needed to Survey of economic inclusion programs and understand the mechanisms through a review of the portfolio of World Bank which the positive and negative effects of operations, identified about 300 economic displacement are felt by host countries, inclusion programs in 95 countries. Of policy responses to forced displacement these programs, approximately a third can help mitigate potential negative effects serve forcibly displaced people and their and create opportunities for local economic hosts (hereafter “displacement-context transformation, enabling forcibly displaced programs”). The review identified 95 people to make a positive contribution active displacement-context programs in to the economy and society. Targeted 45 countries (see map 1.1), mostly in Sub- interventions, such as cash transfers and Saharan Africa (54 percent), the Middle East skills training programs, can help vulnerable and North Africa (15 percent), and Latin host and displaced populations better cope America and the Caribbean (14 percent). with negative impacts in the short term Fifty-two percent of all displacement- and equip them to access more economic context programs are government-led, and opportunities in the medium and longer term. 48 percent are led mostly by NGOs. Interventions that generate employment and increase demand, such as programs that When compared with programs that do support access to finance and technology for not serve people affected by displacement small- and medium-size enterprises, can help (hereafter “nondisplacement-context create formal employment opportunities for programs”), displacement-context hosts and displaced people. Investments in economic inclusion programs operate critical infrastructure and service provision, relatively more frequently in low-income such as health and education, that benefit countries (42 percent versus 25 percent in both hosts and those forcibly displaced help nondisplacement-context countries), fragile increase their human capital, which, in turn, and conflict-affected contexts (54 percent has positive impacts on the economy through versus 23 percent), and urban areas (65 increased productivity and incomes. Such percent versus 56 percent). These trends investments can also support trade, grow mirror the overall footprint of forced markets, and spur local economic processes. displacement, which is highly concentrated in low-income countries; fragile, conflict, and violence (FCV) settings; and urban areas. ECONOMIC INCLUSION PROGRAMS IN DISPLACEMENT CONTEXTS Eighty-one percent of all displacement- context programs focus on a single group Economic inclusion programs offer of forcibly displaced people—refugees, governments an opportunity to deliver IDPs, or returnees—with 70 percent of interventions that can increase income all programs serving refugees. A lower and assets and build the resilience of proportion of all programs (42 percent) displaced people and host populations serves IDPs, which contrasts with the living in poverty (box 1.1 provides a brief fact that this group constitutes the summary of the existing evidence base). majority of forcibly displaced people.17 A global review of economic inclusion programs by the Partnership for Economic Inclusion (PEI), including in PEI’s Landscape The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  6 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Map 1.1 Government and nongovernment programs supporting displacement-affected populations Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Economic inclusion programs are designed variety of programs, the framework in to help people living in extreme poverty figure 1.2, drawn from The State of Economic overcome the multiple barriers they Inclusion Report 2021: The Potential to Scale, face. They are led by governments and reflects the pathways to scale for economic nongovernmental organizations, and typically inclusion programs seeking to strengthen they are delivered by multiple partner resilience and opportunity for the extreme organizations. Because of the number and poor and vulnerable (Andrews et al. 2021). Figure 1.2  Pathways to economic inclusion at scale: a framework Goal: Develop economic inclusion programs that strengthen resilience and opportunity for the extreme poor and vulnerable. Context Response Entry points Adaptations Outcomes Economic lives of Bundle of coordinated, Programmatic the extreme poor multidimensional Increased coverage: and vulnerable interventions to Social number of program Multiple constraints address multiple safety nets ➞ beneficiaries and individual ➞ constraints ➞ • Functional expansion: ➞ and household, Customized to context, layering and linkage of Individual, ➞ community, local influenced by diverse interventions, across household and ➞ economy and country requirements single, complemen- communityl evels formal institutional tary and overlapping Increased income Livelihoods ➞ ➞ levels programs ➞ Institutional and jobs and assets Government strategy ➞ and policy • Policy and strategy Government Ensuring programs com- (including budgeting ➞ Positioning economic inclusion ➞ plement government initiatives, e.g. sector ➞ Financial and financing) • Organizational Government ➞ within complex, systems competing demands and fiscal policy frameworks, support to population groups, mesolevel inclusion (coordination, implementation ➞ Improved program delivery, fiscal, and constraints capacity) investments • Operational (delivery policy coherence systems and platforms) The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  7 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Economic inclusion programs are designed participants while ensuring strong program to respond to the local context to enable delivery and fiscal and policy coherence. people living in extreme poverty to Program design decisions are often achieve the outcomes of more income driven by what is desirable, feasible, and and more assets (see box 1.1). Programs politically acceptable in a given context. must respond to the constraints faced by Box 1.1 The impacts of economic inclusion A review of 80 economic inclusion programs reveals promising and potentially sustained impacts across a wide range of outcomes, including income, assets, consumption, savings, and women’s empowerment. Economic inclusion programs have also been found to increase household resilience through more diversified income sources, increased access to financial services, and strengthened social capital (Andrews et al. 2021). Although the evidence in contexts of forced displacement is scant, the studies that are available suggest economic inclusion programs can also work in these contexts. A recent study of Uganda’s Graduating to Resilience (G2R) activity finds large positive economic impacts on both hosts and refugees. On average, 30 months after receiving the first component of an economic inclusion package, beneficiaries enjoy higher levels of productive assets (mainly livestock), income, consumption per capita, food security, and subjective well-being relative to nonprogram beneficiaries.a The program is also found to be cost-effective, demonstrating that economic benefits exceed average program costs even under more conservative assumptions.b Preliminary results from a study of Mozambique’s Livelihoods for Durable Solutions program show its positive and lasting impacts on the food security, income, and savings of participating households, when compared with control households over the same period.c This study also finds that, by encouraging refugees and hosts to work together, the program leads to positive impacts on social cohesion and trust between the two communities (Beltramo and Sequeira 2022). A closer look at the impacts of economic inclusion programs in fragile, conflict, and violence (FCV) settings can also provide insight into the feasibility of economic inclusion interventions in contexts of forced displacement.e Impact evaluations of economic inclusion programs implemented by both government and nongovernmental organizations in FCV settings are showing promising positive results in displacement settings as well, including higher levels of income, consumption, assets, savings, labor market participation, financial inclusion, and women’s economic empowerment (Arguelles et al. 2019; Bossuroy et al. 2021; Chowdhury et al. 2017; Devereux et al. 2015; Lind, Sabates-Wheeler, and Szyp 2022; Müller, Pape, and Ralston 2019; Noble et al. 2020; Roelen and Saha 2019). These studies indicate that economic inclusion programs can indeed work in FCV settings and, arguably, by extension in displacement-context settings. This research also shows that program implementation and effectiveness can be easily derailed as conflict or shocks similar in nature arise (Lind, Sabates-Wheeler, and Szyp 2022; Müller, Pape, and Ralston 2019). This possibility will require a stronger focus on building the resilience of target populations prior to, during, and after shocks, as well as adaptive programs and delivery systems that can be more responsive in the wake of shocks. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  8 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Box 1.1 Continued a. Partnership for Economic Inclusion, “PEI Country Innovation Exchange on Economic Inclusion and Forced Displacement” (online conference), Session 3, Discussion of Thematic Priorities, December 2021. b. Innovation for Poverty Action, “The Impact of a Graduation Program on Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities in Uganda,” https://www.poverty-action.org/study/impact-graduation-program-livelihoods-ref- ugee-and-host-communities-uganda. This study considered different scenarios to analyze costs to benefits, resulting in a return on investment that ranges between 36 percent (7 percent discount rate and 80 percent persistence of benefits) and 336 percent (5 percent discount rate and 100 percent persistence) for the most cost-effective program package (full program package with group coaching). c. Mozambique’s Livelihoods for Durable Solutions: Enhancing Self-Reliance in a Protracted Refugee Situation program, led by UNHCR, targets poor refugee and host people living in and around the Maratane Refugee Camp in rural Nampula, Mozambique. The economic inclusion package includes cash transfers, business cap- ital, skills training (including resume-writing, soft skills, language and financial literacy, market-oriented skills, and vocational training), coaching, and facilitation to self-employment and wage employment opportunities. d. Colombia’s Transforming My Future program, designed and implemented between the Colombian gov- ernment and Fundación Capital, is a nine-month program that builds on the government’s conditional cash transfer program to provide armed conflict victims with access to business capital and skills training, including in life skills, business, and financial education. e. Over half of displacement-context programs operate in FCV settings. Poor and vulnerable populations in displacement and FCV contexts face similar constraints to sustainable livelihoods, including disrupted livelihood activities; limited or no asset base, which may have been left behind (displacement) or destroyed during conflict; psychological impairment as a result of forced displacement or conflict; and limited access to functioning basic services. See the next section for a more detailed discussion on the constraints found in displacement contexts. The framework is anchored by the program on humanitarian or social assistance programs entry points, which are the foundational and can integrate some components of interventions on which economic existing interventions designed to respond inclusion programs are built, including to forced displacement. Nearly half of the programs targeting people affected by displacement-context programs that build displacement. The three primary entry on SSN interventions are linked to existing points are (1) social safety nets (SSNs), government cash transfer or public works which can include cash transfers and public programs, with the other half building on works programs; (2) livelihoods and jobs the humanitarian support delivered by (L&J) programs, such as training or labor nongovernmental development actors to intermediation services; and (3) financial forcibly displaced people, especially in the inclusion initiatives such as savings-led initial stages of their displacement. Fifty-five or financial skills-building programs. percent of displacement-context programs build on L&J interventions, compared Forty-three percent of displacement- with 71 percent of nondisplacement- context programs build on SSN context programs. Examples of SSN and interventions, compared with 27 percent L&J programs appear in table 1.1. of nondisplacement-context programs. Economic inclusion programs can build The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  9 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced the Context Displacement Table 1.1 examples of economic inclusion programs serving forcibly displaced people and their hosts COUNTRY BURUNDI ECUADOR TURKEY NIGERIA Cash for Jobs Project Graduation Model Ap- Employment Support Multi-Sectoral Crisis PROGRAM (World Bank 2021a) proach (Cahn 2018) Project for Syrians under Recovery Program (Ab- NAME Temporary Protection dulkarim 2022; World and Turkish Citizensa Bank 2017d) START YEAR 2021 2016 2018 2017 GOVERNMENT Yes No Yes Yes -LED Ministry of Social HIAS; jointly imple- Ministry of Family, Labor, Northeast Develop- LEAD Affairs mented by UNHCR and Social Services, ment Commission; IMPLEMENTING and the Ministry of Turkish Employment governments of Borno, AGENCY Economic and Social Agency Adamawa, and Yobe Inclusion states To complement the To improve food To improve the em- To improve access to cash transfers deliv- security and nutrition, ployability of SuTP and basic services and live- ered by the project increase self-suffi- Turkish citizens residing lihood opportunities PROGRAM and to enable extreme ciency and resilience, in Istanbul, Gaziantep, for crisis-affected com- poor households to increase access to Sanliurfa, and Adana munities of three states DEVELOPMENT rights with a rein- increase their produc- and enhance regional OBJECTIVE tivity forced social protec- coordination among tion system, promote these states and other social and economic Lake Chad countries integration Enhances in- Promotes the exit Works in host com- Designed to meet come-generating from extreme poverty munities with a high shorter-term human- capacity of disadvan- of families through presence of SuTP and itarian needs and taged groups with psychosocial support; builds on existing facilitate longer-term increased produc- home visits; training government active labor development by PROGRAM tivity of home-based in entrepreneurship, market programs to improving service DESCRIPTION activities (subsistence employability, and fi- provide a sequence of delivery infrastructure; agriculture, self-pro- nancial education; and interventions to address supporting livelihoods, duction) and strength- development-oriented employment barriers employment creation, ened participation in cash transfers for Turkish citizens and and peace-building labor markets through SuTP processes; and build- access to jobs ing social cohesion Medium-intensity No No Medium-intensity FCV SETTINGb conflict conflict TARGET Hosts, refugees Refugees Hosts, refugees IDPs POPULATION National, urban-rural Regional, urban-rural Regional, urban, Regional, urban/ GEOGRAPHIC mix mix peri-urban peri-urban FOCUS PROGRAM Social safety nets Social safety nets Regional, urban, Livelihoods and jobs ENTRY POINT peri-urban Transfer, business cap- Transfer, business cap- Wage employment Transfer, training, finan- ital, training, coaching, ital, wage employment facilitation, training, cial services facilitation, ECONOMIC financial services facili- facilitation, training, coaching market links, natural INCLUSION tation, market links coaching, financial resource management COMPONENTS services facilitation, market links Note: FCV = fragile, conflict, and violence; IDPs = internally displaced persons; SuTP = Syrians under Tempo- rary Protection; UNHCR = United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. a. Partnership for Economic Inclusion, “PEI Country Innovation Exchange on Economic Inclusion and Forced Displacement” (online conference), Employment Support Project presentation, December 2021. Also see World Bank (2021h). b. FCV setting is based on the World Bank’s list of fragile and conflict-affected situations for July 2021–June 2022 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  10 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Key Issues Faced by Forcibly Displaced People Economic inclusion programs around the world share many common components but are customized to fit the needs of the population served, the location (rural, urban), and the mandate of the government or organizations participating and what arrangements can be negotiated between partners. Programs are developed to respond to specific constraints faced by the population served, enabling people in extreme poverty to overcome barriers and develop sustainable livelihoods. Many of these constraints are shared by the poorest people living in displacement, but people in forced displacement may also have acquired vulnerabilities such as trauma or loss of assets, and these additional barriers must be taken into account when designing economic inclusion programs in contexts of forced displacement (World Bank 2017c). Although displacement-context economic identifying participant constraints and inclusion programs and nondisplacement- gauging their perceptions and aspirations context programs share many similarities, are precursors to designing effecting four distinguishing features related to the economic inclusion programs for forcibly specific constraints faced by forcibly displaced displaced people (Arévalo and Simanowitz people set them apart: (1) the policy and legal 2019; Schuettler 2020).18 The following considerations affecting forcibly displaced sections explore these four features with people; (2) partnerships and institutions an analysis of the constraints in these four working at the intersection of humanitarian domains to consider in program design. and development programs; (3) the local economy in displacement settings; and (4) the relationships between forcibly POLICY AND LEGAL displaced individuals and households and Given the sensitivities inherent in host individuals and households. None of international migration and displacement, these constraints precludes the establishment international, national, and local policies of economic inclusion programs, but and practices have a particularly critical The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  11 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement impact on the design and delivery of National policies, including the right to work displacement-context economic inclusion and the right to movement, can facilitate programs, perhaps to a greater extent than key economic inclusion program activities, those for nondisplacement settings. but the ability of forcibly displaced people to exercise those rights can vary. Depending Recognizing the development challenges on a host country’s regulatory framework, posed by large-scale refugee displacements and forcibly displaced people may face restrictions the need in refugee hosting areas to build the on their right to work, mobility, or access to resilience of local and refugee communities, services. Forcibly displaced people may also in 2018 the United Nations affirmed the face limitations on the ownership or use of Global Compact on Refugees, a blueprint for land, access to productive assets, or access governments, international organizations, to the formal labor market (IDA 2021). and other stakeholders to reduce the pressure However, several countries are ensuring of displacement by helping to enhance their policy commitments function in refugee self-reliance. Signed by 164 nations, practice, thereby allowing host populations the compact acknowledges that the refugee to receive the requisite support and refugees crisis is a shared global responsibility and to lead productive lives. Ethiopia and Niger calls on all sectors of society to help (1) ease have seen a shift in policy toward “out of the pressures on host countries; (2) enhance camps” approaches that aim to improve the refugee self-reliance; (3) expand access to economic opportunities of refugees and third-country solutions; and (4) support host communities beyond camp settings conditions in countries of origin for return in (World Bank 2021b). In Cameroon, Chad, safety and dignity. More broadly, the Global Mauritania, and the Republic of Congo Compact seeks to promote the important role governments have taken steps toward played by host countries and to advance the integrating refugees into social protection self-reliance of refugees, empowering them systems, while in Pakistan efforts are under to meet their needs in a safe, sustainable way to reduce the risk of marginalization manner and preparing them for their through a flexible visa program for refugees future, while also improving socioeconomic (World Bank 2021b). Box 2.1 outlines the outcomes for host communities through policy and legal constraints to consider employment creation, entrepreneurship, when designing and implementing and private sector investment. displacement-context programs. Box 2.1 Policy and legal constraints influencing program design International agreements and platforms can facilitate the inclusion of forcibly dis- placed people in host countries and can inform the response to the effects of displace- ment on hosts. The Global Compact on Refugees has had a positive impact on the global response, but uptake at the national level varies. National policies and regulations may cause restrictions on the right to work (exclu- sion from the formal labor market or restriction to certain sectors) or the rights to access documentation, own or use land, access productive assets, open bank accounts, move around freely, or access public services. Several countries are operationalizing their policy commitments so hosts receive the requisite support and refugees can lead productive lives. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  12 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Box 1.1 Continued Considerations for displacement groups Refugees: UNHCR estimates that 70 percent of refugees live in countries with a restrict- ed right to work, 66 percent in countries with restricted or no right to freedom of move- ment, and 47 percent in countries with restricted or no right to bank accounts (Dempster et al. 2020). IDPs: Typically, there are no legal restrictions on work or mobility, but some countries have residency requirements that create a barrier to accessing certain government ser- vices. Considerations for displacement settings Camps: Refugees may face formal and informal restrictions on mobility, economic op- portunity, and market access. Off-camp: Forcibly displaced people are less likely to be registered, documented, regulated by, and supported by national systems, especially in urban areas. Note: See appendixes A and B for more examples. PARTNERSHIPS AND INSTITUTIONS Because of the complex nature of most Refugees, utilize economic inclusion programs economic inclusion programs, they are to facilitate the transition from emergency to typically delivered by more than one agency greater stability. Increasingly, development or organization (Andrews et al. 2021). organizations are also working in emergency Displacement-context programs often and fragile contexts to smooth the transition feature complex partnership configurations from relief, and coordination across partners as they work across the humanitarian is important. Effective partnerships have and development nexus. Humanitarian been forged to implement economic inclusion organizations play a key role from the early programs, although differences in program days of a displacement crisis, providing cycles, investment capacity, and links with forcibly displaced people with education, development plans must be navigated. An food, cash, shelter, and legal, psychosocial, and understanding of the common institutional other services to help address their immediate constraints and their impacts on forcibly needs. As the emergency transitions to longer- displaced people, as outlined in box 2.2, term displacement, traditional humanitarian is important. For guidance on program support does not sufficiently address the delivery, see the institutional arrangements long-term needs of displaced populations. for program delivery in section 4. Some humanitarian agencies, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  13 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Box 2.2 Partnership and institutional constraints influencing program design Of the range of stakeholders working in the contexts of forced displacement, some are serving displaced people and their hosts. These humanitarian organizations, development organizations, and governments function at varying levels of effec- tiveness and efficiency. Government capacity constraints may impede coordination, staffing, familiarity with the needs of forcibly displaced people, or data management. Humanitarian and development organizations’ coordination challenges can result in parallel service delivery, unequal service delivery to different populations, or gaps in service delivery. Discriminatory practices, formal or informal, may impede forcibly displaced people from accessing programs or services, particularly in the private sector, and some institutions, refugees, and hosts may be unaware of refugees’ rights to access services (Arévalo and Simanowitz 2019). Considerations for displacement groups Refugees: They frequently receive humanitarian support from United Nations (UN) or nongovernmental actors, but often face nonlegal barriers to accessing public and private services, including discriminatory practices, administrative barriers linked to personal documentation, and lack of awareness about their rights. Gov- ernments extending services to refugees may not have experience serving refu- gees or coordinating with other refugee-serving actors. IDPs: Despite a legal right to government programs, access is often restricted in their settlement location. Hosts: Hosts often do not receive support from humanitarian actors, so they may face greater economic hardships than forcibly displaced people. Considerations for displacement settings Camps: Usually, camps are the scene of humanitarian aid and support (shelter, consumption support, health care, education), but coordination is often a chal- lenge, with a significant disconnect between service offerings and actors within and outside of camps. Access to services offered outside camps is extremely limited. Off-camp: If registered, forcibly displaced people may receive consumption support, but they are unlikely to receive other support (shelter, health care, etc.) through humanitarian organizations. They are at higher risk of suffering nonlegal barriers to service access and labor exploitation, especially in urban areas. Note: See appendixes A and B for more examples. LOCAL ECONOMIES limiting access to market opportunities and financial services (Coniglio 2022). Land set The availability of economic opportunities for aside for camps can be of low quality, with forcibly displaced people depends on whether poor soil for agricultural activities and more they live in urban areas, rural settlements, likely subject to land degradation due to or camps. Planned refugee camps tend to climate change. Degradation can be further be located far from urban centers, thereby exacerbated by camp management practices The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  14 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement if land preservation and protection are suited to urban livelihoods, identification not in place (Njenga, Awono, and Watson or certification, and support networks 2021). The speed of demographic change (Goga et al. 2022). Displacement-context and the scale of the flow of people living programs in rural settlements may share in displacement in cities and towns may many characteristics of rural programs in overwhelm city services. Compared with the non-displacement contexts, but forcibly rural poor and economic migrants, forcibly displaced people may not have the right displaced people in urban settings often to own or access land.19 These and other arrive with limited capital, assets, skills constraints are outlined in box 2.3. Box 2.3 Local economy constraints influencing program design Some features of the local economy can inhibit opportunities for the establishment or growth of an economic activity. As a result, forcibly displaced people may find it challenging to move beyond employment in the informal sector. The types of services available may be limited, including markets, health care, and education, each of which can affect people’s economic inclusion and self-reliance. Considerations for displacement groups Refugees: Refugees frequently encounter informal barriers in encounters with local actors, including work, public services, legal services, and documentation. IDPs: IDPs may encounter mistrust and harassment by civil servants, private sector actors, and host community members. Hosts: The residents of host communities may have limited access to markets, espe- cially in rural areas. They may face fewer job opportunities, stressed social systems, and diminished natural resources as a result of displaced populations. Considerations for displacement settings Camps: Camps are often physical barriers to accessing markets and service providers, including financial institutions. The number and type of services tend to be limited to what is provided inside the camp. Economic opportunities are often extremely limited, usually revolving around agriculture and other small-scale self-employment or petty trade; there is little opportunity for wage employment. Residents of camps often have limited or no access to land and other natural resources, and what land may be avail- able is of poor quality or limited in size. Off-camp: In rural settings, displaced people often face constraints similar to those faced by rural host communities, with limited access to services, economic opportu- nities, and markets. Relative to camps, forcibly displaced people in rural settlements and urban areas have greater access to resources. In urban areas, public and private services are more readily available, but the cost of living tends to be higher. Note: See appendixes A and B for more examples. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  15 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement INDIVIDUALS AND HOUSEHOLDS Typically, economic inclusion programs serve both forcibly displaced people and target specific poverty segments, including their hosts in an effort to minimize tensions the poor, extreme poor, and ultrapoor between the two populations. Programs (Andrews et al. 2021). Poverty-related including both groups may seek to address barriers to success will likely be similar in disparities such as the fact that sometimes both nondisplacement- and displacement- forcibly displaced people are better off context settings, so lessons learned from the because of humanitarian aid or in other cases design of economic inclusion programs in hosts benefit from legal access to land or nondisplacement-context settings may also market opportunities. In Burundi, IDPs were apply (such as multidimensional constraints, facing major challenges meeting basic needs time poverty, and psychosocial barriers). and accessing basic services, and returnees were also settling back in and around However, forcibly displaced people can face refugee camps. In response, the Integrated barriers or opportunities that are specific to Community Development Project was the displacement context and that may limit established to target areas that host refugee or enhance their ability to pursue economic camps (World Bank 2020d). The program activities. Barriers may arise if the skill set principally targeted Burundian nationals, or experience of forcibly displaced people including IDPs and returnees as part of the does not match the local context (Schuettler host community, but both host communities and Caron 2020), while elsewhere forcibly and refugees were incorporated through the displaced people may find themselves with project’s multisector, area-based approach. stronger skills than their hosts. IDPs often share stronger cultural or linguistic ties Some of these barriers can be mitigated to hosts, but in camps or settlements on through program design and others cannot the border, communities that live across but identifying those constraints that will international borders may nonetheless share prevent advancement in economic inclusion close bonds. Some nationalities may have activities is critical. Therefore, programs migrated regularly to areas where they later often implement additional diagnostics seek refuge, such as the Syrians in Lebanon so that they appropriately address the and Jordan, and have connections with the specific barriers and opportunities faced host community and experience in the job by each target group, including those market (International Rescue Committee listed in box 2.4 (also see spotlight 2.1). 2016). Most displacement-context programs The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  16 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Box 2.4 Individual and household constraints influencing program design The forcibly displaced, refugees, and IDPs may face additional barriers to economic inclusion: • Assets and savings may be limited or nonexistent because of the disruption of displacement. • Skill sets and experience may not align with market opportunities and can af- fect opportunities for economic and social integration. • Documentation needed to access services may not be available because dis- placed people often arrive without the needed IDs, credentials, or certificates. Not all refugees, particularly the most vulnerable, register their presence in a country with UNHCR or national authorities. • Psychosocial effects linked to the displacement experience (as a result of violence, persecution, xenophobia, or social discrimination) may affect a per- son’s ability to engage in economic activities and have a positive outlook for the future. Some individuals may hesitate to join programs for fear they will lose access to existing programs or lose the ability to access resettlement or other durable solutions. • Social networks, which can be critical to availing oneself of economic opportu- nities and supporting vulnerable households, are often limited because forcibly displaced people settle in new places. This limitation may further exacerbate the emotional and psychological stress associated with forced displacement. • Xenophobia can have a strong negative impact on self-esteem, ability to create networks, and ability to engage successfully in a livelihood. Negative percep- tions within the host community may impede social cohesion. • Mobility of refugees, IDPs, and other forcibly displaced people tends to be higher than in host communities, which may interfere with access to and reten- tion of services, as well as participation in economic activities and programs. Considerations for displacement groups Refugees: Cultural and language barriers in interacting with the hosting community may hamper social and economic inclusion, including the ability to engage in economic activities. Considerations for displacement settings Camps: With limited economic opportunities, refugees may find their opportunities to align skills and experience severely limited. Refugees living in camps are more likely to find other refugees from the same country of origin, which can help increase social cohesion within groups, but also may lead to social tension between different refugee groups. Off-camp: Refugees residing outside camps have a bigger opportunity to align skill sets with market opportunities, especially in urban areas. Social support networks tend to be weak, with forcibly displaced people living independently. Strains on market opportuni- ties, basic service provision, and natural resources may increase conflict with hosts. Note: See appendixes A and B for more detail. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  17 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Spotlight 2.1 Promising practice: the role of diagnostics Practitioners implementing displacement-context programming highlight the importance of using diagnostics to inform program design. Existing diagnostics may not adequately capture the constraints and opportunities faced by forcibly displaced people, and so practitioners note the importance of understanding the roles that setting, context, and identity play in participants’ needs and opportunities. Although diagnostics may highlight multiple constraints and economic inclusion programs are inherently designed to address several of them, programs should prioritize those that are the most pressing and feasible to obtain, without which the economic inclusion intervention will falter. In doing so, they should consider doing the following: • Tailor assessments to address program participant diversity. In Uganda’s G2R program, assessments captured the differing needs and market opportunities of urban and rural participants; men and women (who face additional time and travel constraints); and host and refugee populations, who often have different backgrounds and skill sets. Programs targeting youth should assess how their needs and skill sets differ from those of adultsa. • Tailor program design to the unique needs and opportunities of each population. In Azerbaijan’s IDP Living Standards and Livelihoods Project, diagnostics revealed many constraints to income generation and economic self-reliance among IDPs, and it concluded that their biggest concern was about their physical living conditions (World Bank 2016b, 2019b). So the majority of the funds were dedicated to infrastructure and services to improve living conditions, with additional funds provided for a livelihoods intervention focused on lower-cost, small-scale, community- based initiatives, including skills training, technical support, and financing. a. Partnership for Economic Inclusion, “PEI Country Innovation Exchange on Economic Inclusion and Forced Displacement” (online conference), Session 3, Discussion of Thematic Priorities, December 2021. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  18 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement Program Design in Contexts of Forced Displacement TAILORING PROGRAM refugee camp) and the target population, DESIGN TO NEEDS with all the attendant constraints. Program objectives help shape many Figure 3.1 reveals how displacement- program decisions, ranging from the context programs differ significantly from number and types of components utilized nondisplacement-context programs.20 The to the implementing partner organizations main objectives pursued by displacement- selected. They represent a program’s context programs are enhancing self- intention to respond to participants’ needs, employment opportunities (52 percent of while reflecting institutional priorities. displacement-context programs), social inclusion (36 percent), and food security Program objectives are established based (28 percent).21 For nondisplacement- on the type of entry point or program context programs, the top objective is that serves as the basis for the economic the same, enhancing self-employment inclusion program, whether social safety net, opportunities (45 percent), but the livelihoods and jobs program, or financial second and third are different: income inclusion initiative. They are also informed diversification (41 percent) and increased by the setting (border area, urban area, resilience and productivity (34 percent). Figure 3.1 Program objectives of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs 45.4 52.2 14.7 25.7 33.1 21.2 40.5 23.0 9.8 17.7 6.7 16.8 24.5 36.3 25.2 28.3 33.7 26.5 4.9 2.7 27.6 16.8 22.7 21.2 Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Figure shows the percentage of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs (N1 =163 and N2 = 113, respectively). Respondents were asked to report a maximum of three objectives. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  19 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Program Design Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement There is a stronger focus on enhancing including both forcibly displaced people and self-employment and wage employment their hosts in program activities; through opportunities in displacement-context community mobilization and advocacy; and programs than in other settings and fewer through programming that serves integrated instances of objectives focused on income groups such as village savings and loan diversification or increased productivity.22 associations (VSLAs) and business groups (see This finding reflects the likelihood that spotlight 3.1 for specific program examples). forcibly displaced people arrive with few to no assets or little savings and need to Supporting food security is also one of the establish new economic activities, or at main objectives of displacement-context least add a significant economic activity to programs (figure 3.1), especially among their current income-generating strategies. nongovernment-led programs, because Wage employment is mainly driven by forcibly displaced people often struggle to the fact that it is especially prevalent in meet their most basic needs, especially at urban contexts. In displacement-affected the outset of their displacement.23 Programs contexts, such as in Turkey and Ecuador, frequently seek to address food security by wage employment programming often providing beneficiaries with cash or in- focuses on sensitizing potential employers kind assistance. Chad’s Emergency Food to the rights and responsibilities of forcibly and Livestock Crisis Response program, displaced people, linking individuals which ran from 2017 to 2021, focused to employment opportunities, and on short-term emergency operations to incentivizing hiring of this population. improve food security based on the delivery of conditional food assistance offered As shown in figure 3.1, displacement-context through the World Food Programme (WFP) programs are more likely to have a social before implementing medium- to long-term inclusion objective than nondisplacement- activities to improve economic inclusion context programs (36 percent versus 25 outcomes (World Bank 2014a, 2021c). percent). This objective is often achieved by The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  20 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement Spotlight 3.1 Promising practice: building social cohesion For 36 percent of all displacement-context programs, building social cohesion between displaced people and host communities is a core strategy.a The movement of large numbers of people seeking refuge can affect the environment and natural resources adversely, increase competition for employment opportunities, and heighten competition for resources—all of which can, in turn, result in tension between host communities and forcibly displaced people. Research is emerging on how the perceptions and attitudes of host communities toward forcibly displaced people can be changed by information campaigns to build awareness or through initiatives building on contact theory, which posits that direct and indirect contact between hosts and forcibly displaced people reduces levels of prejudice (Allport 1954). This research offers lessons on which to build, including that interventions promoting contact between refugees and hosts can strengthen cohesion, but principally those interventions that create conditions for success (Betts et al. 2022). Whatever the context, program designers should identify the specific concerns of the community, both perceived and actual, and design interventions and communication strategies accordingly. Community-level interventions that provide the host community and forcibly displaced people with the same or similar benefits can be effective in reducing tensions, such as in Uganda. • Rebuilding infrastructure and funding natural resource projects for refugees and hosts. Since 2016, Uganda’s Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) has sought to effectively mitigate the pressures on social services, economic activities, and the environment of the communities hosting refugees (Limlim 2022; World Bank 2016a, 2019a). It uses labor-intensive public works to support agroforestry, lakeshore restoration, and other infrastructure initiatives to address the damage arising from the presence of refugees, while also promoting sustainable livelihood development among both population groups to help provide economic support. Both refugees and hosts receive financial support and training, but conditions and timing are different to account for their different situations. Social cohesion can be improved through mixed participation in program activities. Research shows that shared activities that do not result in competition may help to improve hosts’ attitudes toward refugees (Betts et al. 2022). • Mixed classes and workplaces. In Turkey, the Employment Support project, which ran from 2017 to 2020, sought to target Turkish citizens and Syrians under Temporary Protection in equal numbers to ensure that the Turkish host population did not feel left behind. It also created opportunities for close interaction between the two communities through mixed classes and workplaces.b The program was beneficial to job seekers, giving both Syrians and Turkish people an opportunity to work in a formal environment and become acclimated to the labor market. Community mobilization and advocacy models have also been used to address social cohesion within displacement economic inclusion programs.          • Burkina Faso’s Projet Filets Sociaux Burkin Naong Sa Ya (PFS/BNS)—formerly the Scale-Up and Responding to the Needs of Refugees and Host Communities program (World Bank 2014b)—has since 2014 conducted awareness-raising and capacity building for traditional and religious leaders on laws affecting refugees. With project teams, the leaders seek to prevent rights infringements, ask the community to avoid stigmatizing refugees, and help refugees and hosts accept that traditional class divisions will become more fluid, “erasing the distinction between masters and slaves.” a. This proportion is higher for government than for nongovernment displacement-context programs (42 percent versus 34 percent). b. The Employment Support Project for Syrians Under Temporary Protection and Turkish Citizens Project (Employ- ment Support) and the Development of Businesses and Entrepreneurship for Syrians under Temporary Protection and Turkish Citizens Project (Development of Business and Entrepreneurship). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  21 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement CUSTOMIZING A PACKAGE OF SUPPORT An economic inclusion package is customized individual components, or how components to meet the needs of targeted populations and are delivered. This section describes some of respond to program objectives, institutional the key considerations and possible adaptations mandates, and the context in which programs for forcibly displaced people. Table 3.1 operate. Customization may be in terms of the is an overview of the core components of types of components included in the overall displacement-context economic inclusion economic inclusion package, the design of programs and examples of adaptations. Table 3.1 Key considerations and potential adaptations of core economic inclusion components in contexts of forced displacement COMPONENT POTENTIAL ADAPTATIONS PROGRAM EXAMPLES Build on existing government Chad’s Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project originally TRANSFERS programs or humanitarian aid to provided unconditional food assistance for refugees and returnees and provide consumption support conditional food assistance to all eligible participants (both offered where WFP, UNHCR, or others through WFP). Later, all food assistance was made conditional to reduce are already providing forcibly friction between communities. displaced people with a transfer. Such a step can reduce tensions from differential treatment or help facilitate a local partnership with an existing transfer provider. When possible, retain the current Burundi’s Cash for Jobs Project plans to extend its basic social safety design of the transfer (mecha- net system by including refugees and host communities (World Bank nism, amount, frequency, and 2021f). duration) to support operational efficiency and social cohesion. Consider adjusting amounts and In Ecuador, WFP was encouraged to provide HIAS Ecuador’s gradua- duration to respond to varying tion participants with food vouchers for six months (valued at US$40 needs, regardless of displace- per person per month) to ensure sufficient food consumption in the ment status. period before livelihood profits were generated. However, this amount was later determined insufficient to cover participants’ basic needs, so UNHCR offered a top-up through 12-month supplemental cash transfers for refugees. Hosts received a government cash transfer. Provide business capital or assets The Uganda G2R RCT results reveal that the impacts of the economic BUSINESS so that forcibly displaced people inclusion program, including higher productivity and a return on invest- CAPITAL can engage in new self-employ- ments, were larger when beneficiaries received an asset transfer than ment economic activities because when they did not.a they arrive with limited or no assets. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  22 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement COMPONENT POTENTIAL ADAPTATIONS PROGRAM EXAMPLES Work with the private sector to Turkey’s Formal Employment Creation Project provides employers with WAGE generate wage employment op- access to capital conditional on employing refugees and vulnerable EMPLOYMENT portunities for targeted groups, Turkish citizens (World Bank 2020c). Turkey’s Agricultural Employment FACILITATION including short-term job place- Support for Refugees and Turkish Citizens Through Enhanced Market ment to increase readiness and Linkages provides large farms with plans for soft skills training to assist facilitate inclusion of displaced in worker management and relationships with refugees (World Bank people in the labor market. 2020a). Match the sectors that have labor Brazil’s Operation Welcome programb offers Venezuelan refugees gaps with forcibly displaced voluntary relocation to another part of the country to engage in wage people’s skills to help ensure that employment, matching refugees to existing job vacancies, a recommen- they play a positive economic dation resulting from research revealing that Venezuelan refugees and role in host countries. Where a migrants face challenges integrating into the education system, social skills mismatch exists, combine protection programs, and the formal labor market (Shamsuddin et al. with training for targeted groups 2021). to align with market demands (see training). Make private sector companies Various NGO- and UNHCR-led programs conduct direct outreach to more aware of the rights and and capacity building for potential employers to build their interest and contributions of forcibly dis- willingness to work with and hire forcibly displaced people and hosts. placed people. Ecuador sensitizes prospective employers to the value and rights of refugees to reduce the prevalence of discriminatory practices against refugees. It offers legal and administrative support for private compa- nies willing to hire refugees and matches companies with a pool of refugee job seekers (Arévalo 2019). Consider language and cultural Concern Worldwide’s economic inclusion programs in Africa have re- COACHING norms. cruited coaches who speak the same language as refugees to facilitate clear and effective communication (Swatton 2022). Include messaging about self-re- HIAS’s Ecuador project conducts mentorship services in pairs. A protec- liance. tion case worker conducts regular home visits to provide mentoring and psychosocial support, while a livelihoods mentor works with participants to define a personalized livelihood plan. To address refugees’ growing dependence on humanitarian support and reticence to move off cash transfer support, coaches are trained to build participants’ under- standing of and buy-in for engagement in livelihood activities to build self-reliance. Use coaching to address the Uganda’s G2R RCT found that approximately 50 percent of the control psychosocial barriers associated group suffered from mental health challenges, compared with 30 per- with the traumas and experienc- cent of program participants. Inclusion of interpersonal therapy sees an es faced by forcibly displaced 80 percent reduction in mental health issues. In response, the program people such as gender-based is integrating IPT into its coaching sessions. violence and increase awareness about their rights and obligations in the hosting community. Include job counseling in the Jordan’s RYSE project has one family mentor, who focuses on pro- mentoring offered to displaced tection, soft skills, and women’s empowerment, and one livelihoods populations to increase knowl- mentor, who focuses on support related to income generation (Danish edge about the local labor Refugee Council 2020). market. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  23 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement COMPONENT POTENTIAL ADAPTATIONS PROGRAM EXAMPLES Offer additional training to help In Zambia, UNHCR/Trickle Up’s Graduation Approach project, which TRAINING forcibly displaced populations closed in 2020, primarily served refugees fleeing Burundi from urban match their skills to local de- centers where they worked in government offices (Simanowitz 2019). mand, thereby helping them to As a result, significant technical training support was required from Self integrate into the local context or Help Africa, UNHCR, and its partners to adapt refugees to the agricul- overcome specific challenges. tural livelihood opportunities in rural Zambia. Burkina Faso’s PFS/BNS program incorporates topics of social cohesion and conflict prevention into its social and life skills training. Offer language skills, life skills, Turkey’s Employment Support Project training. Turkish language train- and other training to support bet- ing was offered to Syrian refugees and programs translated training ter social, cultural, and economic modules into Arabic. The modules offered soft skills or life skills training integration of displaced people. “specifically tailored to refugees.” This included training to improve worker adaptation to the agricultural context and the on-the-job behav- iors expected by Turkish employers, training on job searches and the Turkish labor market culture, and information on social life, culture, and legal rights and responsibilities. Consider remote or e-work The Gaza Emergency Cash for Work and Self-Employment Support Proj- opportunities. ect pays NGOs to train young people in the skills needed to become online freelancers. Participants receive two months of training and six weeks of coaching to help them acclimate to the work. The project was especially successful during the COVID-19 crisis. As necessary, help forcibly Costa Rica’s Livelihoods and Economic Inclusion Program worked with displaced people overcome the national government’s training program to offer vocational training. formal and informal barriers to To increase accessibility, the courses were delivered at the office of the accessing training. implementing partner ACAI. UNHCR also established a memorandum of understanding that allowed forcibly displaced people to take place- ment/certification exams in lieu of presenting education certificates as a prerequisite for enrollment because many refugees arrived in Costa Rica without the necessary documentation (Trickle Up 2016). Outside of camps, the high Uganda’s DRDIP program has faced challenges related to refugees’ FINANCIAL mobility, geographic spread, high mobility in rural contexts. The program opted to utilize a village SERVICES and lack of trust among forcibly revolving fund rather than a grant to support livelihood activities FACILITATION displaced people may render for refugees and host community members. The fund is primarily a group-based access to finance precaution against refugees receiving a more traditional cash loan and unfeasible or an inappropriate moving without repaying it. The model was piloted with host community mechanism for supporting members and then adapted to refugees and mixed groups. The pro- financial inclusion. Where legal gram reduced the amount of funds available to refugees by two-thirds, and feasible, consider establish- compared with that offered to host community participants, until they ing links to more formal financial could prove their ability and willingness to repay. services. Provide financial literacy training In Ecuador, HIAS and UNHCR’s partnership with Fundación CRISFE, the to increase awareness of how to nonprofit arm of Banco Pichincha, used adult learning methodologies to access financial services locally provide financial literacy trainings for participants, which were rein- and encourage savings. forced by coaches (Arévalo 2019). Work with private financial In Costa Rica, UNHCR worked with BAC San Jose bank to send circulars service providers to increase informing front-line staff of current regulations that allow financial awareness of the rights of forci- service providers to serve refugees and providing workarounds for bly displaced people to access addressing administrative barriers related to refugees’ ID cards. financial services. Facilitate access to saving mecha- After facing challenges working with savings groups in an urban refugee nisms for forcibly displaced peo- context, HIAS’s Graduation Model Approach program in Ecuador focused ple so they can build resilience on facilitating access to savings through formal bank accounts. Despite and assets. This is critical because a legal right to open accounts, most refugees were not able to meet the of their low access to safety nets requirement of presenting a valid ID card. The program made Banco and an asset base and their high Pichincha aware of the challenge and identified a more basic savings exposure to recurrent shocks. product that could be opened with proof of residence including a hu- manitarian visa. Note: DRDIP = Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project; G2R = Graduating to Resilience; IPT = interpersonal therapy; NGO = nongovernmental organization; PFS/BNS = Projet Filets Sociaux Burkin Naong Sa Ya; RCT = randomized controlled trial; RYSE = Resilient Youth Socially and Economically Empowered; SuTP = Syrians under Temporary Protection; UNHCR = United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; WFP = World Food Programme. a. Innovation for Poverty Action, “The Impact of a Graduation Program on Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities in Uganda,” https://www.poverty-action.org/study/impact-graduation-program-livelihoods-refugee- and-host-communities-uganda. b. Partnership for Economic Inclusion, “PEI Country Innovation Exchange on Economic Inclusion and Forced Displacement” (online conference), presentation on inclusion for Venezuelan refugees and immigrants in Brazil, December 2021. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  24 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement Despite the challenges associated with forced transfers for consumption smoothing and displacement, 77 percent of displacement- meeting basic needs (69 percent versus 60 context economic inclusion programs deliver percent). This is especially true in programs a package that includes five or more of the that serve internally displaced people (81 following components: transfer, business percent versus 60 percent of other programs capital, wage employment facilitation, not serving IDPs) and that have food security coaching, training, financial services as an objective (81 percent versus 64 percent). facilitation, market links, and natural Although 90 percent of displacement-context resource management (figure 3.2, panel b).24 programs provide cash transfers,25 when Figure 3.2, panel a, shows the percentage programs operate in FCV settings they are of nondisplacement- and displacement- much more likely than displacement-context context programs that include each of the programs in non-FCV settings to provide broad types of components in their economic cash in exchange for work (38 percent versus inclusion package. Some interesting trends 8 percent). These cash-for-work programs emerge. Displacement-context economic can help rebuild community infrastructure inclusion programs are more likely than that may have been damaged during conflict. nondisplacement-context programs to include Figure 3.2 Number and types of program components of economic inclusion programs Displacement a. Distribution of nondisplacement- 70 and displacement-context programs, 60 60.7 Non-displacem by number of broad economic 50 46.9 inclusion components 40 30.0 30 24.5 20 13.5 15.9 Non-displacement 10 6.2 Displacement 0 1.2 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8 b. Broad components components components components components Transfer 60.1 69.0 Displacement context 79.1 Business capital 77.0 Non-displacement context 30.1 Wage employment facilitation 48.7 96.9 Skills training 96.5 92.0 Coaching 85.0 74.8 Financial services facilitation 58.4 68.7 Market links 80.5 63.8 Non-displacement Natural resource management 43.4 Displacement 0 20 40 60 80 100 Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Figure shows percentage of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs (N1 = 163 and N2 = 113), respectively. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  25 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement Displacement-context economic inclusion enhancing resilience to climate change and programs are also more likely than other supporting sustainable livelihoods are an programs to facilitate access to wage area of increasing importance globally, it is employment opportunities (49 percent versus particularly important in contexts of forced 30 percent) and markets (81 percent versus 69 displacement, especially where there are percent).26 This finding may, in part, reflect high concentrations of forcibly displaced the fact that many of these programs are in people such as in camps or settlements.27 urban areas where links to wage employment Some interesting examples are starting to may be more readily available. However, these emerge. For example, the Development components may also be included to address Response to Displacement Impacts Project, barriers that prevent forcibly displaced a regional program operating in refugee- people from accessing markets, including hosting areas in Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, lack of knowledge about the local labor and Uganda, facilitates access to renewable market and lack of access to social networks energy and improved energy sources, in the hosting community. Thus, programs including solar power and clean cooking serving forcibly displaced populations stoves, and the adoption of sustainable are more likely than nondisplacement- land management practices (World Bank context programs to facilitate access to 2017b, World Bank 2021b). In Uganda, the job placements, including traineeships project is also using labor-intensive public and apprenticeships (80 percent versus 69 works to address the environmental effects percent) and to work with the private sector thought to be linked to the high presence of to create wage employment opportunities refugees and to help reduce social tensions (65 percent versus 47 percent). See table that may arise from them.28 Learn more in 3.1 for examples of programs working with Spotlight 3.1: Building social cohesion. private sector companies for this purpose. Often, displaced people require additional Programs may also seek to adapt the design training or capacity building to match the of some program components to better demand in the local market or to access respond to the specific needs of displaced livelihood opportunities in the host country. people. Because refugees often confront For example, as noted earlier, refugees who psychological trauma that affects their ability were office workers in Burundi’s capital to engage in economic activities, 33 percent required significant technical training of all displacement-context programs (or 39 support from UNHCR and its implementing percent of the 85 percent of displacement- partners when they arrived in rural Zambia context programs that include coaching—see so they could take advantage of agricultural figure 3.2, panel b) use coaching to provide livelihood opportunities. Displaced people psychosocial support. Many nongovernment- may also benefit from learning more about led programs offer coaches additional their legal rights and responsibilities, training on psychosocial concerns and employee relationships in the host country, well-being to enable them to adequately or life skills related to specific challenges respond to displaced people’s needs. (see table 3.1 for an example from Turkey). Interventions geared toward supporting the The components described in figure 3.2 sustainable management of natural resources relate to the economic inclusion intervention and climate change adaptation are less specifically, but most economic inclusion common in displacement-context programs programs led by governments are part of a than in nondisplacement-context programs much larger initiative with other components (43 percent versus 64 percent). Although that may address other important barriers The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  26 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement to the economic inclusion of forcibly 79 percent of programs, respectively—see displaced people and hosts and increase figure 3.3, panel a), the order in which the impact and effectiveness of economic these are provided could be adapted to inclusion initiatives. For example, many better respond to the needs of displaced displacement-context programs such as populations. In Turkey’s Employment the Socio-Economic Inclusion of Refugees Support Project, participants were allowed and Host Communities project in Rwanda to transition to different types of training (World Bank 2019d) include economic programs (language, skills, job, etc.) to infrastructure projects that address the keep them engaged, which is a variation on degraded environmental conditions in refugee its program for Turkish citizens. Program hosting districts. These projects may upgrade sequence may also be informed by the or rehabilitate roads connecting refugees and need to build the capacity or confidence host communities to economic opportunities of participants to undertake livelihood and market infrastructure near the camps. or other program activities. For instance, participants who are struggling with trauma Although most nondisplacement- and may require psychosocial or other support displacement-context programs deliver to ensure they can effectively participate. components in sequence (85 percent and Figure 3.3 Sequencing and duration of economic inclusion program components, by nondisplacement and displacement context a. Sequencing of program components b. Average program duration for beneficiaries 100 100 Yes No Between one and three years 80 No Under one year Yes 80 More than three years 60 60 40 40 20 20 More than three years 0 0 Non-displacement context Displacement context Non-displacement context Displacement context Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Figure (both panel a and b) shows percentage of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs (N1 = 163 and N2 = 113), respectively. In figure 3.3, panel b, displacement-context programs are likely led by humanitarian programs tend to be of shorter duration organizations, which often have short than nondisplacement-context programs, one-year budget cycles. Uganda’s G2R particularly among nongovernment project, originally designed as a 30-month implementers. Twenty-two percent of intervention, saw participation decline nongovernment implementers report having significantly after month 24. As a result, the programs shorter than one year compared program is being adapted to 24 months. with 16 percent of government implementers. Only 9 percent of nongovernment All program design decisions are based on programs run for three years or more, the best available information at program compared with 26 percent of government launch. See Spotlight 3.2 on the importance programs. Many of these nongovernment of ensuring those program designs retain flexibility to respond to changing contexts. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  27 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly in Contexts Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People of Forced in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Displacement Spotlight 3.2 Promising practice: design for flexibility Programs operating in contexts of forced displacement, balanced between humanitarian and development responses, can be volatile, and so it is important to design and implement programs that are adaptable. Even based on the best diagnostic studies, the initial program design will include assumptions about program implementation that must be verified with monitoring data and information from the implementing staff. Program design may need to be adapted to meet the requirements of different population groups or different settings. Furthermore, the conditions for forcibly displaced people can change, which can affect program design and implementation. These conditions can include legal rights, location, situation in the home country, and level of risk aversion. Flexible design will depend on good data and information, good communication, and agile decision-making. At a PEI conference on forced displacement and economic inclusion in December 2021, government representatives from Brazil, Kenya, and Turkey all agreed that these are critical elements for success. In Brazil, coordination among the municipal, state, and federal levels was improved with a point person working at the project site to facilitate communication and decision-making. A few guidelines emerged: • Balance the humanitarian and development needs of the population. Nigeria’s Multisectoral Crisis Recovery Program (MCRP) is implementing a phased intervention to address short- term humanitarian priorities while planning for medium- and long-term durable solutions. Initially, IDPs, refugee returnees, and host communities receive psychosocial support, in-kind assets, and capacity building to develop livelihoods and peaceful coexistence. This support serves as the base on which to build longer-term economic inclusion solutions, including labor-intensive public works, livelihood support, and community engagement strategies. • Shift investments to respond to a changing context. Designed prior to the civil war, the Republic of Yemen’s Smallholder Agricultural Production Restoration and Enhancement Project, which ran from 2017 to 2021, originally targeted poor households and smallholders (World Bank 2017e, 2021g). However, the project was modified to prioritize recovery and rebuilding activities. These activities included expanding programming to specifically target those directly affected by conflict such as IDPs and returnees, reengaging them in the crop and livestock sectors to restore their livelihoods, and providing income for their basic needs. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  28 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Delivering Economic Inclusion Programs in Contexts of Forced Displacement INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR PROGRAM DELIVERY The vast majority of economic inclusion and humanitarian actors are especially programs are delivered by more than one important. In Chad, the government’s organization because of the complexity of Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis delivering a multipronged intervention Response project partnered with UN (Andrews et al. 2021). However, the types of agencies with strong in-country programs, institutional arrangements that are devised such as WFP, the Food and Agriculture for the program must respond to the context Organization (FAO), the International within which the program is implemented. Organization for Migration (IOM), and UNICEF, for project implementation. In contexts of forced displacement, an The project also used lists of registered ecosystem of organizations is often already resettlement beneficiaries from IOM and extending services to forcibly displaced WFP to determine food assistance lists. people. Displacement-context economic inclusion programs often build on this A range of government programs are humanitarian support, and many government utilized to deliver economic inclusion programs use the expertise of these interventions, including jobs training, humanitarian organizations for targeting and enterprise development, and cash transfer serving displaced populations. For example, programs (see figure 4.1 which shows some government programs serving SuTP the percentage of nondisplacement- and in Turkey are working with the Turkish Red displacement-context programs integrated Crescent (which has a long track record of with an existing government program. working with forcibly displaced populations) Panel b shows the subset of government- to support beneficiary outreach and the led programs in nondisplacement and delivery of program components. In Nigeria, displacement contexts). For example, rather the Youth Employment and Social Support than create new interventions for SuTP, Operation program, which ran from 2013 to Turkey’s Employment Support Project built 2020, outsourced the process of enumerating on economic inclusion programs that were and documenting IDPs in the unified register already in place to serve Turkish citizens. This of beneficiaries to humanitarian agencies, civil effort included extending training programs society organizations, NGOs, universities, or already offered to SuTP through Turkey’s firms—a step taken to speed up the process. Employment Agency (IŞKUR). By making slight adaptations, including adding Turkish When a government’s capacity to extend language training and capacity building to support to forcibly displaced people or help IŞKUR staff work with Syrians, the implement complex economic inclusion program has effectively utilized its program programs is constrained, partnerships and systems to serve a new population group. between government and other development The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  29 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Figure 4.1 Economic inclusion programs integrated with existing government programs (overall and government-led), by displacement status a. Overall Cash transfer Displacement context Public works Nondisplacement context Labor intermediation Jobs training Enterprise development Active labor market Financial inclusion 0 10 20 30 40 50 Percent Displacement context Non-displacement context b.Government Cash transfer Displacement context Public works Nondisplacement context Labor intermediation Jobs training Enterprise development Active labor market Financial inclusion 0 10 20 30 40 50 Percent Displacement context Non-displacement context Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Panel a provides the percentage of overall nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs (N1 = 163 and N2 =113, respectively). Panel b provides the percentage of nondisplacement- and displacement-context pro- grams that are government-led (N1 = 87 and N2 = 31, respectively). Some government agencies may not be Further, in some countries the government accustomed to working with displaced agency that is responsible for refugee populations and may not be familiar issues, such as the ministry of the interior with policies and regulatory environment or ministry of defense, may face a lack affecting forcibly displaced people, the of trust because of the ministry’s other formal and informal barriers they might organizational mandates. Partnering with face, or the good practices for engaging organizations with a track record working forcibly displaced people directly. In forcibly displaced populations and ensuring response, many governments are building programs are well-designed and responsive to their capacity to serve this population, and the constraints faced by displaced people will some programs plan to build the capacity improve the likelihood for program success. of the ministries involved in expanding social protection to refugee populations. In Coordination between different ministries Chad, the Refugees and Host Communities and with, and between, different Support Project plans to build such capacity humanitarian and development organizations because most of the ministries involved is critical to ensure the timely and effective in the expansion of social protection to delivery of programs and services, to avoid refugee populations have no experience duplication, and remove barriers that may working with displaced populations. impede participant success. See Spotlight 4.1 on Effective partnerships for more. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  30 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Spotlight 4.1: Promising practice: effective partnerships Given the complexity of economic inclusion programs, most of which include five or more components, and the specific constraints faced by forcibly displaced populations, establishing effective partnerships between government and development and humanitarian organizations is important in the early stages of program design. Coordination between different service providers is also important to ensure effective implementation and so as not to duplicate services. Several good practices have emerged to guide enhanced collaboration and coordination: • Ensure organizations with experience serving people affected by displacement are engaged from early design to ensure programs are responsive to the needs of forcibly displaced people and current data is used in program design. In Guatemala, the Ministry of Labor, in its role implementing a regional comprehensive framework for refugees, is seeking to facilitate a favorable environment for the economic protection of forcibly displaced populations. To support the effort, UNHCR provides detailed information on the socioeconomic status and labor profiles of refugee populations and helps strengthen the operational capacity of the Ministry of Labor to respond to an increasing flow of displaced people. • Establish effective coordination among government agencies, humanitarian organizations, and development actors to avoid duplication of efforts. Often a humanitarian response to forced displacement includes the creation of a service delivery system that is parallel to that of the host government. The new system may be necessary to establish a suitable response quickly, but it can lead to the duplication of infrastructure, low- quality services, and poor outcomes for both the refugee and host communities. • Plan for the transition to more sustainable and scalable government-led development responses for forcibly displaced people by designing programs that will be sustainable over the medium or long term. Many economic inclusion programs seek to link with mainstream government provisioning and over half of displacement- context programs are integrated with existing government interventions.29 • Utilize interagency committees, which are an effective strategy to facilitate coordination. Many countries create interagency committees for strategic and operational support or agreements between refugee- and nonrefugee-serving ministries, ensuring that the roles and responsibilities of each government agency and implementing partner are clearly delineated. Serving host and refugee populations increases the complexity of project management tasks, requiring enhanced multisectoral collaboration and coordination. Niger’s Refugees and Host Communities Support Project works under the High-Level Tripartite Committee on the Humanitarian-Development Nexus and is led by a multidisciplinary project steering committee, composed of four ministries and the High Authority for the Consolidation of Peace, in coordination with key members of the humanitarian, security, and development partners (World Bank 2018, 2021d, 2021e). TARGETING AND SELECTING BENEFICIARIES Seventy percent of displacement economic refugees, IDPs, or returnees. In addition inclusion programs serve refugees, 42 to targeting people in displacement, these percent serve internally displaced people, programs also reach out to poor populations. and only 5 percent target returnees (see As shown in figure 4.3, the poverty profile figure 4.2). Over 80 percent of displacement of participants in displacement-context economic inclusion programs focus on a programs is very similar to that of those single group of people in displacement: in nondisplacement-context programs. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  31 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Figure 4.2 Percentage of displacement-context economic inclusion programs serving groups of forcibly displaced people Refugees 69.9 Internally displaced 41.6 Returnees 5.3 Percent Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Figure shows percentage of displacement-context programs (N = 113). Programs may target more than one segment. Figure 4.3 Profile of people targeted by nondisplacement- and displacement- context economic inclusion programs Displacement context Nondisplacement context Ultrapoor 34.4 Ultrapoor 37.2 Extreme poor 66.3 Extreme poor 62.8 Poor 55.2 Poor 55.8 Other vulnerable Other vulnerable 29.4 36.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Non-displacement context Non-displacement context Displacement Displacement context context Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: Figure shows percentage of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs (N1 = 163 and N2 = 113, respectively). Programs may target more than one segment. The vast majority of displacement-context interventions target forcibly displaced economic inclusion programs have eligibility people who are willing and ready to engage criteria. Because of the poverty focus of and invest in new economic opportunities. displacement-context programs, 85 percent Many people may not be immediately use poverty status as a program eligibility ready, as some may be experiencing the criterion. Programs that serve refugees are psychological impacts often associated with more likely than other programs to select displacement, such as anxiety and depression, beneficiaries on the basis of behavioral or they may fear that engaging in this attributes, such as grit or motivation (41 type of program would mean losing access percent versus 25 percent). This criterion may to humanitarian assistance (Arévalo and enable programs to ensure economic inclusion Simanowitz 2019; Wilson and Roxani 2017). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  32 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Economic inclusion programs use a range necessary or appropriate to develop slightly of methods to select participants, including varied targeting approaches for host and geographic, community-based, and proxy refugee populations because the definition of means test targeting. The targeting strategy poverty for each population may vary slightly. utilized may depend on the programmatic and institutional arrangements within which the Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) and program is developed, the wider context in poverty wealth ranking (PWR), a targeting which economic inclusion programs operate, methodology used by most economic and displacement-related considerations. For inclusion programs, may be less reliable in a example, although geographic targeting is camp or urban refugee setting. Urban refugee used less frequently in urban areas (Dutta et contexts often involve heterogeneous and al. 2021), where forcibly displaced people are segregated groups with high mobility and concentrated in or near urban areas (in camps, significant distances between households. In settlements, or specific city neighborhoods), urban settings and in many refugee camps programs may rely on targeting by geographic or settlements, there may be less sense location. Where there are political sensitivities of community or even distrust between or barriers to targeting forcibly displaced households, particularly when populations people directly, programs may adopt a from different countries or ethnic groups geographic targeting approach to benefit both are living together. As a result, the PRA and forcibly displaced people and their hosts. For PWR approaches are often less effective example, Kenya’s DRDIP project combines in displacement settings than in other community-based targeting with geographic contexts. Nonetheless, PWR and other PRA targeting to select the poor and extreme processes have proven successful in certain poor living in the subcounties hosting the refugee settings, particularly in areas where main refugee camps, including Dadaab and refugees have settled for prolonged periods. Kakuma. Where tensions are high, programs Nearly half of the government programs using geographic targeting may even avoid serving forcibly displaced people use an referencing forcibly displaced people to avoid existing government social registry to sensitivities and underscore the benefits to all. identify program beneficiaries. Some of these The use of poverty scorecards or other programs have included or seek to include proxy means tests by organizations may be refugees and IDPs in the government’s social constrained by the difficulty of collecting registry, particularly if there are plans to serve data from displaced populations, especially them through social protection programs. when there are security concerns. There This approach can help to streamline the may also be uncertainty about whether the selection processes, especially if governments existing scorecards can accurately estimate anticipate offering comprehensive and the poverty level of targeted people, including comparable services to displaced people refugees and host communities. In Uganda, and to host communities. However, it may AVSI adapted the existing Poverty Probability pose significant challenges in a displacement Index based on communities’ definitions of context, including the availability of data poor and extreme poor to better identify and concerns about managing security eligible households for its G2R program. during data collecting (see spotlight 4.2). If poverty scorecards are used, it may be The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  33 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Economic Inclusion Understanding the Displaced People Displacement Programs in Context Contexts of Forced Displacement Spotlight 4.2 Promising practice: using existing data sources Governments and development organizations may find it difficult to collect information on forcibly displaced people. They are mobile, making tracking a challenge, and they may be fearful or distrustful of governments or unknown organizations. Security concerns for staff may also prevent the collection of data and information. Several promising practices have emerged: • Partner with humanitarian organizations for key diagnostic information to support program design. Mauritania’s Social Safety Net System Project II is using beneficiary profiling work carried out by UNHCR and WFP to expand its social registry to include camp-based refugees (World Bank 2015a, 2015b, 2020e). • Support targeting and serving displaced people by engaging with refugee-serving agencies. In the Agricultural Employment Support for Refugees and Turkish Citizens Through Enhanced Market Linkages program, the Agricultural Credit Cooperative-Central Union is subcontracting beneficiary outreach activities to the Turkish Red Crescent, which has experience working with refugees. • Integrate data from humanitarian organizations where security concerns prevent collection. Nigeria’s Youth Employment and Social Support Operation program updated its Unified Registry of Beneficiaries (URB) to serve as a registry for IDPs (World Bank 2016c, 2019c, 2020f, 2020g). Although it was originally designed for community- based targeting to build the state social registry, because of an insurgency data could not be collected safely in most IDP camps, and so the URB was developed by integrating databases of the IOM, UNHCR, state emergency management agencies, and other local and international civil society organizations. Led by the Joint Data Center on Forced Displacement, longer-term strategies are being developed to build systems that report data on forcibly displaced people and their hosts that can be used to inform program and policy recommendations that in turn improve sustainable livelihoods. In Kenya, a partnership between UNHCR, the World Bank, and the National Bureau of Statistics is seeking to produce comparative data sets for refugees and hosts that are integrated into the framework of Kenya’s Continuous Household Survey. This activity will produce a comparative socioeconomic profile for both populations and provide policy recommendations to improve and reach sustainable livelihoods. With more evidence-based and targeted programs and policies in place, the livelihoods for these populations are more likely to be improved.30 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  34 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Conclusion As economic inclusion programs proliferate globally, building on successful experiences over the past two decades, programs for forcibly displaced people are at a relatively early stage of development, mostly in design or early implementation stages. But interest in these programs is high as the number of people living in forced displacement rises, accentuating the need for strategies that support forcibly displaced people and generate positive impacts on host communities and their economies. The number of people living in forced Yet the evidence on the economic impact on displacement is increasing precipitously host communities of forced displacement and the war in the Ukraine together with shows that forced displacement can the ongoing displacements from Syria and have a positive contribution on overall Venezuela will soon push the number of household well-being. Providing economic forcibly displaced people over 100 million. opportunity to forcibly displaced people, The most emergent crises like Ukraine particularly when combined with effective trigger humanitarian responses to address policy responses to forced displacement, immediate needs for food, cash, shelter, can help mitigate potential negative and legal and other services. But the effects and create opportunities for local majority of forcibly displaced people live economic transformation. This can enable in situations of protracted displacement forcibly displaced people to make a positive of an average of 10 years in which longer- contribution to the economy and society. term development strategies are required. At the same time, the global community is In addition to challenges faced by forcibly beginning to consider cross-border migration displaced people, there are growing concerns more broadly as an integral part of the about the burden on host populations. development process, both for forcibly Hosting displaced populations can place displaced populations and economic migrants, economic, social, and financial pressures and strategies to help people overcome on the host countries, many of which are vulnerabilities are a key development already struggling to support their own challenge. With these movements, the populations. These countries may already context of the individual and that of the host face strains on government safety nets, local country will both inform the appropriate infrastructure, and natural resources, and development response, a tailoring that is hosting a new population, often in specific inherent to economic inclusion programs. geographic areas, can place an additional burden on these limited resources. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  35 Introduction Forced Key Issues Faced Program Design in Delivering Economic Conclusion Displacement: by Forcibly Contexts of Forced Inclusion Programs Understanding the Displaced People Displacement in Contexts of Forced Context Displacement Within this context, globally an estimated responses. Leverage the expertise of 95 programs launched by governments, humanitarian and development actors humanitarian organizations, and other to respond to evolving needs and help institutions in 45 countries use economic participants build resilience over time. inclusion programs to try to increase • Use diagnostics to inform program design income and assets and build the resilience drawing on government data where possible for host communities and of forcibly displaced people and host integrating data from displacement- communities living in poverty. A review serving agencies to design programs of evidence from 80 economic inclusion responsive to participant needs. Assess the programs reveals promising and potentially different constraints, skills, and capacities sustained impacts across a range of outcomes. of displaced people and hosts in each Although the evidence in contexts of forced context and design programs accordingly. displacement is sparse, studies suggest these • Build flexibility in partnerships, programs can work in these contexts too. program design, and implementation to respond to the unpredictable nature Many of the 95 programs identified in of work in these contexts. Balance the this report are just beginning so more humanitarian and development needs of evidence and documentation of good the population and be prepared to shift practice will emerge in coming years. investments to respond to changes. But a review of recent implementation As programs develop, efforts to share experience points to the need to: experience and evidence will lead to a clearer understanding of how to refine economic • Ensure programs include both host inclusion programs in these contexts, how communities and forcibly displaced people and policy makers can facilitate the engagement take deliberate steps, as part of program activities, to build social cohesion and of forcibly displaced populations in economic reduce tension. The movement of large activities, and how programs can help numbers of people seeking refuge can beneficiaries overcome the constraints impact natural resources and increase characteristic of contexts of forced competition, which may result in or displacement. Documenting operational exacerbate existing tensions between host and implementation lessons will be critical communities and forcibly displaced people. and reflecting the variety of contexts, both • Establish partnerships that build on the of the individual and the receiving country, ecosystem of humanitarian and development will help inform future program planning. organizations working in displacement Increasing the landscape of impact, process, contexts. Seek to reduce duplication and other evaluations will help identify of services and manage the transition the specific features of successful economic to more sustainable development inclusion in forced displacement settings. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  36 Appendixes The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  37 Appendix A: Understanding Target Groups and their Constraints The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  38 Institutions and Local economy Individual and Policy and legal partnerships and services household INTERNALLY International agreements Humanitarian sup- Accessing services. Services and Skill sets and experience. IDPs’ DISPLACED and platforms. IDPs are port. IDPs may or may income-generation activities skill sets and experience are often included, if not explicitly, in not receive human- (IGAs) may not be accessible to not aligned with market oppor- PERSONS most agreements. itarian support for people who relocate frequently. tunities. (IDPs) National policies and basic services. Recognition of documentation. Psychosocial. IDPs often suffer regulation: Local facilities in area of service the psychosocial impacts of FCV may restrict access to programs contexts, plus displacement. • Typically, IDPs have and services despite a legal right Networks. Social and economic legal access to existing to access. support networks are limited. government safety net Appropriateness of IGA Xenophobia. Levels of distrust schemes. opportunities. Market between IDPs and host communi- • Social protection opportunities may be limited in ties are high. systems are often weak the less desirable locations. Assets and savings. IDPs often due to the fragile, con- Discrimination. IDPs may arrive with few assets and little flict, and violence (FCV) encounter frequent mistrust and savings. context. harassment by civil servants, Documentation. IDPs often arrive • IDPs have no legal private sector actors, and host without the necessary IDs and restrictions on work, community members. credentials and certificates. mobility, financial inclu- sion, public services, and documentation. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  39 Institutions and Local economy Individual and Policy and legal partnerships and services household National policies and Government capacity. Appropriateness of IGA oppor- Skill sets and experience. Refu- regulation. Refugees are Governments may tunities. Refugees frequently live gees’ skill sets and experience directly affected by legal not have experience in less desirable locations with often do not align with market restrictions and regulations. serving refugees or limited market opportunities. opportunities. Work. Refugees often coordinating with Access to work and services. Ref- have no legal right to work other refugee-serving ugees often face informal barriers Psychosocial. Refugees often suffer formally or informally and actors. in encounters with local actors: from the psychosocial impacts of have few work protections. Government practice. FCV contexts, plus displacement. They may face strict work Policy on paper often • Work. Legal (potential Networks. Social and economic permit requirements; does not translate into employers may not be aware support networks are limited. restrictions on working in implementation or of refugees’ rights); dis- Culture and language. Both may specific sectors; employ- enforcement. crimination (such as police result in difficulty finding work and ment quotas based on Humanitarian support. harassment, employer and achieving social integration. nationality. Refugees frequently customer biases, informal Xenophobia. Distrust among Mobility. Refugees may receive humanitarian barriers to accessing work refugees or host communities may require permits for travel; support from UN or permits; documentation be high. face restrictions on leaving nongovernmental ac- (necessary education or work experience not recognized); Assets and savings. Refugees camps; require permits for tors, especially in camp distance/transport (especially often arrive with few assets and travel or face barriers to settings. in camps/rural areas). little savings. congregating with other Coordination between • Public services (health, edu- Documentation. Refugees often refugees. stakeholders may be cation). Refugees may not be arrive without the necessary IDs Financial inclusion. Refu- disjointed. aware of their rights or how to and credentials and certificates. REFUGEES gees often do not have a Discriminatory prac- legal right to open savings tices. Refugees are access services: or loan accounts, or both. often denied access to • Legal. Potential employers, Public services. Refugees support services (finan- financial service providers frequently do not have a cial, employment, etc.), (FSPs), and others may not be right to access government despite a legal right. aware of refugees’ rights to social protection services. work, financial inclusion, etc. Documentation. The re- Distance/transport. Refugees quirements and timing for face frequent physical barriers needed refugee documen- to accessing markets, FSPs, etc., tation may be challenging. especially in camp/rural settings. Discrimination. Refugees encounter informal barriers to work, access to financial services, or access to other services (for example, police harassment of self-employed, discrimination by potential employers or FSPs). Documentation. Employers may not recognize certificates of origin, FSP systems may not know how to process refugee IDs. International agreements Government practice. Access to work. Extremely poor Xenophobia. Host communities and platforms. Host com- Extremely poor host host community members often often blame displaced populations munities are Included, if not community popula- suffer from high rates of unem- for economic and social inequali- explicitly, in most agree- tions are often over- ployment or underemployment, ties and strains. ments and platforms. looked by government especially women and youth. National policies and safety nets, despite a Access to resources. Host com- regulations: legal right to them. munities may have limited access Humanitarian support. to markets, especially in rural HOST • Host communities have Host communities are areas, and may suffer from the legal access to any COMMUNITY often overlooked by strains placed on job opportuni- existing government humanitarian support ties, social systems, and natural safety net schemes. and actors. resources by displaced popula- • Host communities face no legal restrictions on tions. work, mobility, financial inclusion, public services, and documen- tation. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  40 Appendix B: Understanding Program Settings and their Constraints The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  41 Policy and legal Institutions and Local economy Individual and partnerships and services household National policies and Humanitarian support. Distance/transport. Physical barri- Skill sets and experience. Refu- regulations. Camp- Camps usually are the site ers are often imposed to accessing gees’ skills and experience often based refugees are often of significant humani- markets, FSPs, etc. do not align with the limited IGA restricted by specific tarian aid and support Number and type of services. opportunities available within laws, particularly related (shelter, consumption Services tend to be limited to what the camp. to mobility, right to work, support, health care, is provided inside the camp. Culture and language. Refu- and documentation education). Significant Economic opportunities. Oppor- gees from the same country of PLANNED barriers are imposed to tunities are often extremely limited, origin are more likely to be in REFUGEE access to services outside whereas agriculture and other the same camp, which can help of the camp. small-scale self-employment or petty increase social cohesion. How- CAMP Coordination between trade are emphasized. There are few ever, they may face distrust from stakeholders. A signif- opportunities for wage employment. refugees from other countries icant disconnect often Natural resources. Camp residents of origin or other social groups, exists between service often have no access to land and resulting in a limited opportu- offerings and actors in other natural resources, or the land nity to integrate with the host and outside of a camp is of poor quality and in small lots. community. setting. National policies and Humanitarian support. Access to work and services. Barri- Skill sets and experience. Rural regulations. Displaced Humanitarian aid or sup- ers and opportunities are similar to settlements offer more oppor- people in rural settle- port is limited. those faced by rural host commu- tunities to align with market ments are less likely to nities. opportunities. be registered, document- Distance/transport. Physical barri- Culture and language. More ed, regulated by, and ers are often imposed to accessing opportunities are available for supported by national markets, FSPs, etc. social cohesion and integration systems. Number of services. Services tend with the host community to be limited. Xenophobia. Strains on market RURAL Appropriateness of IGA opportu- opportunities, basic service SETTLEMENT nities. Rural settlements offer more provision, and natural resources options for income generation, may increase conflict with the particularly through diverse self-em- host population. ployment. Natural resources. Those in rural settlements may have better access to land and natural resources. Public services. Some access is offered to health and education services when there is a legal right. National policies and Humanitarian support. If Access to work and services. Ur- Skill sets and experience. regulations. Displaced not registered, displaced ban areas offer the most opportuni- Urban areas offer more oppor- people in urban areas are people are less likely to ties to access: tunities to align with market the least likely to be regis- receive humanitarian opportunities, especially wage • Distance/transport. There is tered, documented, reg- support. employment. generally no barrier. ulated by, and supported Stakeholder coordina- Networks. Displaced people • Number of services. Density is by national systems. tion. Support offered by are often disconnected from highest. Government public ser- government, humanitar- social support. Appropriateness of IGA opportu- vices. Social protection ian, and development Psychosocial. The psychological nities. Urban areas offer the most services are less likely to actors is frequently impacts of insecure housing options for income generation, in- reach urban communi- uncoordinated. tenure, fear of eviction, and cluding off-farm wage employment. URBAN ties and even the host Discriminatory prac- exposure to crime are factors. Discrimination. Refugees and community. tices. Urban areas are Culture and language. More AREAS characterized by a higher others may still face discriminatory opportunities are available for practices despite the increased risk of police detainment social cohesion and integration numbers and short distance to basic (refugees) and employer with the host community. services. exploitation. Xenophobia. It is often higher Mobility. Cost of living and lack because of the close integration of housing support result in high with the host community. mobility. Cost of living and security. Urban areas are characterized by a higher cost of living, population density, and unemployment, as well as limit- ed housing options. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  42 Appendix C: Active Displacement- Context Economic Inclusion Programs Mapped Globally The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  43 Project name Country Lead implementing Started Surveyeda agency Stronger Women Stronger Nations Afghanistan Women for Women Interna- 2002 Yes Program tional Women Economic Empowerment Afghanistan Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation 2010 Yes Project and Development (MRRD) Socio-Economic Support Program Aruba HIAS 2021 Yes (SESP) Azerbaijan Employment Support Azerbaijan The Ministry of Labor and 2020 Yes Project Social Protection of Popula- tion (MLSPP) for Republic of Azerbaijan IDP Living Standards and Liveli- Azerbaijan Social Fund for Development 2012 No hoods Project of IDPs Improving Peaceful Co-Existence Bangladesh Mukti Cox’s Bazar 2019 Yes and Self-Reliance Opportunities for Refugees and Host Community Self-Reliance and Peaceful Co- Bangladesh Centre for Natural Resources 2019 Yes existence for Refugees and Host Studies Communities Internal Relocation Based on Job Brazil Brazilian Army 2018 Yes Opportunity Projet Filets Sociaux Burkin Naong Burkina Faso Supervising Ministry and Min- 2014 Yes Sa Ya (PFS/BNS) istry of Finance Supporting Host Communities and Burkina Faso Danish Refugee Council 2021 Yes IDPs to Facilitate Sustainable Tran- sition Towards Inclusive Solutions (SHIFT) Burundi Integrated Community Burundi Ministry of Interior 2020 Yes Development Project Burundi Skills for Jobs: Women and Burundi Ministry of National Education 2021 No Youth Project and Scientific Research Cash 4 Jobs Project Burundi Ministry of Social Affairs 2021 Yes Adaptive Safety Nets and Economic Cameroon Ministry of Economy, Planning, 2022 No Inclusion Project and Regional Development (MINEPAT) Cameroon Social Safety Nets Project Cameroon Cameroon Social Safety Nets 2014 Yes Project Implementation Unit Strengthening the Resilience, Cameroon Danish Refugee Council 2021 Yes Self-Reliance, and Socio-Economic Inclusion of Central Africa Repub- lic’s Refugees and Host Community Households Living in Extreme Pover- ty in Cameroon Chad Refugees and Host Communi- Chad Cellule Filets Sociaux 2019 No ties Support Project Inclusive Development in Reception Chad Caritas Suisse 2018 Yes Zones (DIZA-Sud) Inclusive Development of Host Areas Chad Concern Worldwide 2018 Yes Programme (DIZA) Lake Chad Region Recovery and Chad Lake Chad Basin Commission, 2020 No Development Project PROLAC PIU Transforming My Future Colombia Fundación Capital 2013 Yes The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  44 Project name Country Lead implementing Started Surveyeda agency Families in their Land (Familias en su Colombia Prosperidad Social 2016 No Tierra) Eastern Recovery Project Congo, Democratic Fonds Social de la République 2020 Yes Republic of Démocratique du Congo Stronger Women Stronger Nations Congo, Democratic Women for Women 2004 Yes Program Republic of International CG. Rep. Lisungi Safety Nets System Congo, Republic of Ministry of Social Affairs 2014 No Project Commercial Agriculture Project Congo, Republic of Ministry of Agriculture, 2018 No Fisheries and Livestock Northern Congo Agroforestry Congo, Republic of Ministry of Forest Economy 2021 No Project Graduation Model Approach (GMA) Costa Rica HIAS 2020 Yes Livelihoods and Economic Inclusion Costa Rica United Nations High Commis- 2017 Yes Programme sioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Help Refugees Work Cyprus Cyprus Refugee Council in 2017 Yes partnership with UNHCR Cyprus Development Response to Displace- Djibouti Agence Djiboutienne de 2016 Yes ment Impacts Project in the Horn of Développement Social (ADDS) Africa (DRDIP) Integrated Cash Transfer and Human Djibouti Ministry of Social Affairs and 2019 No Capital Project Additional Financing Solidarity Graduation Model Approach (GMA) Ecuador HIAS, Ministerio de Inclusión 2016 Yes Económica y Social del Ecua- dor, and UNHCR Community Protection Networks El Salvador Plan International 2019 Yes and Durable Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons, Deportees with Protection Needs, and Persons at Risk of Forced Displacement Delivering Resilient Enterprises Ethiopia Village Enterprise NA No and Market Systems (DREAMS) for Refugees Development Response to Displace- Ethiopia Federal Ministry of Agriculture 2016 Yes ment Impacts Project in the Horn of Africa Enhanced Response for Nutrition Ethiopia Concern Worldwide 2020 Yes Emergency ET Productive Safety Nets Project 4 Ethiopia Ministry of Agriculture 2015 No (PSNP 4) Ethiopia Economic Opportunities Ethiopia Ethiopian Investment 2018 No Program Commission Integrated Programme towards Ethiopia Concern Worldwide 2014 Yes Health System Strengthening, Building Resilience, and Enabling Evidence-Based Graduation Urban Productive Safety Net and Ethiopia Ministry of Urban Develop- 2020 Yes Jobs Project (UPSNJP) ment and Infrastructure Graduation Model Guatemala Acción Contra el Hambre Yes The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  45 Project name Country Lead implementing Started Surveyeda agency Socio-Economic Support Program Guyana HIAS 2021 Yes (SESP) Partnering to Scale Up Graduation India Pravah and Vedic Society 2017 Yes with Jharkhand State Livelihood Promotion Society (JSLPS) in India Tamil Nadu Rural Transformation India Rural Development and 2017 Yes Project (TNRTP) Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu Achieving Socio-Economic Stability Iraq AVSI Foundation 2020 Yes of Returnees, Host Community, and IDPs in Iraq (ASET) Stronger Women Stronger Nations Iraq Women for Women 2018 Yes Program International Resilient Youth Socially and Econom- Jordan Danish Refugee Council 2020 Yes ically Empowered Project (RYSE) Graduation Approach (GA) Program Rural Economic Growth and Employ- Jordan Jordan Enterprise Develop- 2015 Yes ment Project (REGEP) ment Corporation (JEDCO) Small-Ruminant Investments and Jordan Ministry of Agriculture 2018 Yes Graduating Households in Transition (SIGHT) The Youth, Technology, and Jobs Jordan Ministry of Digital Economy 2020 Yes Project (YTJ) and Entrepreneurship Healthy Food Snacks for Improved Kenya Concern Worldwide Kenya 2018 Yes Health and Nutrition Status Among Children and Pregnant Women in Poor Urban Informal Settlements in Nairobi County: An Innovative Pub- lic-Private Partnership Approach Kosova Women 4 Women Kosovo Kosova Women 4 Women 1999 Yes (KW4W) Municipalities for Youth in Kosovo Kosovo Ministry of Local Government 2020 No Project Administration CHASE Youth Empowerment Pro- Lebanon Danish Refugee Council 2022 Yes gramme (Capable, Hopeful, Accept- ed, Safe, and Engaged Youth) Emergency National Poverty Target- Lebanon Ministry of Social Affairs 2014 No ing Program Project Livelihoods Program Lebanon Concern Worldwide 2016 Yes Mauritania Social Safety Net System Mauritania Délégation Générale TA- 2020 Yes Project II AZOUR Co-Meta Women’s Economic Em- Mexico ProSociedad (in collabora- 2018 Yes powerment Program tion with UN Women Second Chance Education Pro- gramme) Programme d'Insertion Economique Morocco Association Marocaine d'Ap- 2007 Yes des Réfugiés Urbains au Maroc pui à la Promotion de la Petite (PISERUMA) Entreprise (AMAPPE) Northern Crisis Recovery Project Mozambique Ministry of Agriculture and 2021 No Rural Development (MADER) The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  46 Project name Country Lead implementing Started Surveyeda agency Northern Mozambique Rural Resil- Mozambique ProAzul, National Sustainable 2021 No ience Project Development Fund (FNDS), and BioFund Forests for Prosperity at a Time of Nepal Ministry of Forests and 2021 Yes Transformation Project supporting Environment (MoFE) the implementation of the Nepal Forest Strategy (2016) and the Na- tional Forest Policy (2019) Enhancing the Well-Being of the Niger Concern Worldwide 2017 Yes Extreme Poor in Tahoua Lake Chad Region Recovery and Niger Lake Chad Basin Commission, 2020 No Development Project Executive Secretariat for the SDS Sahel Niger (SE/SDS Sahel-Niger) Niger Refugee and Host Communi- Niger Strategy for the Development 2019 Yes ties Support Project and Security of Sahelian- Saharan Areas of Niger (SDS) Agro-Climatic Resilience in Semi-Ar- Nigeria Federal Ministry of Environ- 2021 No id Landscapes (ACReSAL) ment Multisectoral Crisis Recovery Pro- Nigeria North East Development 2017 Yes gram (MCRP Additional Financing) Commission; Governments of Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe States Removing Hunger from Poverty Nigeria Central Bank of Nigeria NIR- 2018 Yes Through Agriculture in Africa SAL Microfinance Program Stronger Women Stronger Nations Nigeria Women for Women Interna- 2002 Yes Program tional Balochistan Livelihoods and Entre- Pakistan Planning and Development 2020 No preneurship Project Department, Government of Balochistan Graduation Model Approach (GMA) Peru HIAS 2020 Yes Pathways to Economic Inclusion Rwanda Caritas Rwanda 2022 Yes and Self-Reliance of the Refugees and Host Communities in Rwanda Through Scaling Up Graduation Approach Social Economic Inclusion of Rwanda Six districts hosting refugee 2019 Yes Refugees and Host Communities in camps, Development Bank of Rwanda Project (SEIRHCP) Rwanda, and Rwanda Trans- port Development Agency Stronger Women Stronger Nations Rwanda Women for Women Rwanda 1997 Yes Program (formerly a country office of Women for Women Interna- tional) Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme— Rwanda Local Administrative Entities 2008 Yes Minimum Package of Graduation Development Agency (LODA) (MPG) Social Transfers to Vulnerable People Somalia Ministry of Employment, Social 2020 Yes Affairs, and Family (MESAF) Emergency Locust Response Project South Sudan Ministry of Agriculture and 2021 No Food Security, IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Center The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  47 Project name Country Lead implementing Started Surveyeda agency South Sudan Resilient Agricultural South Sudan Ministry of Agriculture and 2021 No Livelihoods Project Food Security Stronger Women Stronger Nations South Sudan Women for Women Interna- 2013 Yes Program tional RESTORE II Graduation Approach Syrian Arab GOAL NA No Republic Agricultural Employment Support Turkey Agricultural Credit Coopera- 2021 Yes for Refugees and Turkish Citizens tives of Turkey through Enhanced Market Linkages Development of Businesses and Turkey Small and Medium Enterprises 2019 Yes Entrepreneurship for Syrians Under Development Organization Temporary Protection and Turkish (KOSGEB) Citizens Project Formal Employment Creation Project Turkey Development and Investment 2020 Yes Bank of Turkey (TKYB) Social Entrepreneurship, Empower- Turkey Ministry of Industry and 2021 No ment, and Cohesion Project Technology Building Self-Reliance and Resilience Uganda Danish Refugee Council 2022 Yes in West Nile Delivering Resilient Enterprises Uganda Village Enterprise NA No and Market Systems (DREAMS) for Refugees Development Response to Displace- Uganda Office of Prime Minister 2016 Yes ment Impacts Project (Regional) Graduating to Resilience Activity Uganda AVSI Foundation 2017 Yes Prevention through Sustainable Uganda BOMA Project NA No Graduation from Poverty in West Nile, Uganda (GRA-PRO-CHILD) Eastern Ukraine: Reconnect, Recov- Ukraine Ukravtodor, Ministry for 2021 No er, Revitalize (3R) Project Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories Gaza Emergency Cash for Work and West Bank and NGO Development Center 2019 Yes Self-Employment Project Gaza Yemen Social Protection and Yemen, Republic of UNICEF, UNDP 2021 No COVID-19 Response Project Transforming Landscapes for Resil- Zambia Luapula, Muchinga, and north- 2019 Yes ience and Development (TRALARD) ern provincial administrative authorities Zimbabwe Idai Recovery Project Zimbabwe United Nations Office for 2020 No Project Services (UNOPS) Source: Partnership for Economic Inclusion, World Bank. Note: a. Surveyed programs have submitted a PEI Landscape Survey in 2020 or 2022. Those not surveyed did not but were identified during a scan of World Bank–supported programs and outreach to organizations supporting or implementing economic inclusion programming to identify programs serving people in displacement and their hosts. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  48 Notes 1 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Persons Who Are Forcibly Displaced, Stateless and Others of Concern to UNHCR,” Refugee Data Finder, Methodology, https://www.unhcr.org/refu- gee-statistics/methodology/definition/. 2 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Frequently Asked Questions: Facts, Figures and Terminology,” https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/frequently-asked-questions.htm. 3 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Persons Who Are Forcibly Displaced, Stateless and Others of Concern to UNHCR,” Refugee Data Finder, Methodology, https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/methodology/definition/. 4 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “What Is a Refugee?” Refugee Facts, https://www. unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/what-is-a-refugee/. 5 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Persons Who Are Forcibly Displaced, Stateless and Others of Concern to UNHCR,” Refugee Data Finder, Methodology, https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/methodology/definition/. 6 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Persons Who Are Forcibly Displaced, Stateless and Others of Concern to UNHCR,” Refugee Data Finder, Methodology, https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/methodology/definition/. 7 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Global Trends: Forced Displacement In 2020,” https://www.unhcr.org/flagship-reports/globaltrends/. 8 PEI Landscape Survey 2020. In this context, populations affected by displacement include people in displacement (mainly refugees, internally displaced persons, and returnees) and their hosts. 9 Nearly 80 percent of all economic inclusion programs serving people in displacement and their hosts have been launched since 2017. 10 Data and experiences shared in this report have been compiled from (1) the PEI Landscape Sur- vey 2020 (and an update in 2022), as well as a scan of World Bank–supported programs to identify economic inclusion programs serving people in displacement and their hosts; (2) a review of over 30 government-led programs in 2022; (3) interviews with 12 World Bank task team leaders supporting government-led programs; (4) a selected literature review; (5) the PEI Country Innovation Exchange held December 2, 2021, convening over 100 government and World Bank representatives; and (6) the Fragility Forum 2022 session on economic inclusion and forced displacement. 11 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Operational Data Portal, Ukraine Refugee Situa- tion, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine. 12 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Figures at a Glance,” https://www.unhcr.org/en- us/figures-at-a-glance.html. 13 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Global Trends: Forced Displacement In 2022,” https://www.unhcr.org/flagship-reports/globaltrends/. 14 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Refugee Camps,” Refugee Facts, https://www. unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/camps/. 15 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Settlement in Rural Areas,” UNHCR Emergency Handbook, 4th ed., https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/36033/settlement-in-rural-areas. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  49 16 Verme and Schuettler (2019) reviewed 49 empirical studies from 1990 to 2018 in 17 displacement contexts in low-, medium-, and high-income countries, and then conducted a meta-analysis of 762 results in the reviewed studies (2019). 17 Data on targeted groups affected by forced displacement are from the PEI Landscape Survey 2020. The data include active and closed programs, with no differences between these programs in the groups being targeted. 18 Useful guidance on early assessment and guidance on minimum requirements for economic inclusion can be found in the Minimum Economic Recovery Standards and Trickle Up’s Graduation in an Urban Refugee Context. 19 Appendix A provides a more comprehensive review of constraints for different groups of people in displacement. Appendix B is a more comprehensive review of constraints in program settings. 20 Data in this and the following sections are from the PEI Landscape Survey 2020 of economic in- clusion programs, unless otherwise stated. The survey captured responses from 276 unique programs, of which 169 are active and 107 are closed. The 277 economic inclusion programs represent 66 percent of all such programs mapped globally (418 programs, 291 active and 127 closed). For the purpose of com- paring the main characteristics of nondisplacement- and displacement-context programs, both active and closed programs captured through the survey are included. Most of the programs not captured through the survey are government-led. Therefore, the characteristics of the displacement-context programs pre- sented here are likely skewed toward nongovernment programs. Where differences exist in the charac- teristics of government versus nongovernment-led displacement-context programs, such differences are noted in the text. 21 There are some differences between government- and nongovernment-led programs in displace- ment contexts: Government-led programs are more likely than nongovernment-led programs to focus on increasing access to wage employment opportunities (36 versus 22 percent), social inclusion (42 versus 34 percent) and enhancing access to social services (39 versus 9 percent). Nongovernment-led programs in displacement contexts are more likely than government-led programs to have as a goal income diversifica- tion (29 versus 7 percent), food security (35 versus 10 percent) and resilience (29 versus 19 percent). 22 Irrespective of whether programs are in low- or higher-income settings. Although the percentage of all programs that have increased access to wage employment as an objective is higher in upper-middle-in- come countries (33 percent) than in low-income (13 percent) and lower-middle-income (14 percent) countries, in low-income countries displacement-context programs are more likely than other programs to aim for increased wage employment opportunities (21 percent versus 8 percent in nondisplacement contexts). Nongovernment-led programs in displacement contexts are more likely than government pro- grams to have income diversification as a strategy. 23 Thirty-five percent of nongovernment-led programs in displacement contexts have food security as a main objective, as opposed to 10 percent of government-led programs in displacement contexts. 24 Eighty-three percent of nongovernment-led programs versus 64 percent of government-led programs in displacement contexts deliver economic inclusion packages consisting of five or more components. 25 Cash transfers includes cash, near-cash (e.g., vouchers), and cash for work. The percentage of dis- placement-context programs delivering cash transfers is similar to the proportion (87 percent) of nondis- placement-context programs that provide cash transfers. 26 This trend is also observed when looking at the subset of programs implemented in Sub-Saharan African countries, where 33 percent of displacement-context programs facilitate access to wage em- ployment versus 14 percent of nondisplacement-context programs. Equally, within FCV contexts dis- placement-context programs are more likely than nondisplacement-context programs to include wage employment programming (33 percent versus 18 percent). Within displacement settings, government-led The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  50 programs are more likely than nongovernment-led programs to facilitate access to wage employment op- portunities (58 percent versus 45 percent). On the contrary, nongovernment-led programs are more likely than government-led programs in displacement contexts to support access to markets (87 percent versus 66 percent). 27 Evidence on the effect of hosting forcibly displaced people on the hosting environment appears to be mixed. Some studies suggest that hosting large numbers of forcibly displaced people leads to nega- tive environmental effects, such as soil erosion, overall land degradation, and deforestation (Maystadt et al. 2020; Ogude 2018; UNDP Bangladesh and UN WOMEN Bangladesh 2018), while others find that impact is small or dependent on local factors, such as government capacity and response to the influx of forcibly displaced populations (Aksoy and Tumen 2021; Salemi 2021). Regardless of the direction of the evidence, the studies reviewed point to the need for concerted efforts to preserve and protect the envi- ronment. 28 Labor-intensive public works include tree planting, agroforestry, wetlands/riverbank/ lakeshore restoration, and gulley control structures (World Bank 2021b). 29 Seventy-seven percent of government-led and 42 percent of nongovernment-led programs build on existing government interventions to deliver program components for people affected by displacement. 30 World Bank, “Kenya: Integrating Vulnerable Populations into Continuous Household Survey Frame- work,” World Bank–UNHCR, Joint Data Center on Forced Displacement (JDC), https://www.jointdata- center.org/kenya-integrating-vulnerable-populations-into-continuous-household-survey-framework/. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  51 References Abdulkarim, Babazanna. 2022. “Advancing Economic Inclusion for Forcibly Displaced People.” Fragility Forum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoeXmFjBS7o&t=3s. Aksoy, Cevat Giray, and Semih Tumen. 2021. “Local Governance Quality and the Environmental Cost of Forced Migration.” Journal of Development Economics 149: 102603. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0304387820301784?via%3Dihub. Allport, G. W. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Addison-Wesley. Altındag, Onur, Ozan Bakis, and Sandra Rozo. 2020. “Blessing or Burden? The Impact of Refugees on Businesses and the Informal Economy.” Journal of Development Economics 146: 102490. https://www.onuraltindag.info/static/pdfs/ published/ABR_JDE_2020.pdf. Andrews, Colin, Aude de Montesquiou, Inés Arévalo Sánchez, Puja Vasudeva Dutta, Boban Varghese Paul, Sadna Samaranayake, Janet Heisey, et al. 2021. The State of Economic Inclusion Report 2021: The Potential to Scale. Wash- ington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34917 Arévalo, Inés. 2019. Adapting the Graduation Approach for Refugees in Ecuador. New York: Trickle Up. https://refugees. trickleup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Adapting-Graduation-for-Refugees-in-Ecuador_Case-Study_FINAL. pdf. Arévalo, Inés, and Anton Simanowitz. 2019. “Lessons from Trickle Up and UNHCR—Applying a Refugee Lens to Grad- uation: Key Factors in Determining Appropriateness. New York: Trickle Up. https://refugees.trickleup.org/wp-con- tent/uploads/2019/12/Applying-a-Refugee-Lens-to-Graduation_Lessons_FINAL.pdf. Arguelles, Bedoya Guadalupe, Aiden Coville, Johannes Haushofer, Mohammad Razaq Isaqzadeh, and Jeremy Shap- iro. 2019. “No Household Left Behind: Afghanistan Targeting the Ultra Poor Impact Evaluation.” Policy Research Working Paper 8877, World Bank, Washington, DC. Ayenew, Ashenafi Belayneh. 2021. “Welfare Impact of Hosting Refugees in Ethiopia.” Policy Research Working Paper 9613, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35408. Beltramo, Theresa, and Sandra Sequeira. 2022. “Compelling Evidence that the Graduation Approach Promotes Eco- nomic and Social Integration in Displacement Settings: The Case of Mozambique.” UNHCR Blogs, March 9, 2022. https://www.unhcr.org/blogs/evidence-the-graduation-approach-promotes-socioeconomic-integration-in-dis- placement-settings-mozambique/ Betts, Alexander, Maria Flinder Stierna, Naohiko Omata, and Olivier Sterck. 2022. “Social Cohesion and Refu- gee-Host Interactions: Evidence from East Africa.” Policy Research Working Paper 9917, World Bank, Washing- ton, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/36918. Bossuroy, Thomas, Markus Goldstein, Dean Karlan, Harounan Kazianga, William Parienté, Patrick Premand, Cath- erine Thomas, et al. 2021. “Pathways Out of Extreme Poverty: Tackling Psychosocial and Capital Constraints with a Multi-faceted Social Protection Program in Niger.” Policy Research Working Paper 9562, World Bank, Wash- ington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/35211/Pathways-out-of-Extreme-Pov- erty-Tackling-Psychosocial-and-Capital-Constraints-with-a-Multi-faceted-Social-Protection-Program-in-Niger. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Cahn, Gabe. 2018. “HIAS in Ecuador Recognized for ’Graduating’ Refugees Out of Extreme Poverty.” HIAS Blogs, January 22, 2018. https://www.hias.org/blog/hias-ecuador-recognized-graduating-refugees-out-extreme-pover- ty#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Graduation%20Model%20for%20Refugees,of%20falling%20back%20into%20pover- ty.%E2%80%9D. Caruso, German, Christian Gomez Canon, and Valerie Mueller. 2010. “Spillover Effects of the Venezuelan Crisis: Migration Impacts in Colombia.” Oxford Economic Papers 73 (2): 771–795. https://academic.oup.com/oep/arti- cle/73/2/771/5647315?login=true. Chowdhury, Reajul, Elliott Collins, Ethan Ligon, and Munshi Sulaiman. 2017. “Valuing Assets Provided to Low-In- come Households in South Sudan.” Discussion Paper, BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Clemens, Michael, Cindy Huang, and Jimmy Graham. 2018. “The Economic and Fiscal Effects of Granting Refugees Formal Labor Market Access.” Center for Global Development Working Paper 496, Washington, DC. https:// www.cgdev.org/publication/economic-and-fiscal-effects-granting-refugees-formal-labor-market-access The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  52 Coniglio, Nicola, Vitorocco Peragine, and Davide Vurchio. 2022. “The Geography of Displacement, Refugees’ Camps and Social Conflicts.” Policy Research Working Paper 9983, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowl- edge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/37207/The-Geography-of-Displacement-Refugees-Camps-and-So- cial-Conflicts.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Danish Refugee Council. 2020. “Partnership: The RYSE Project.” Danish Refugee Council, Copenhagen. https://drc. ngo/about-us/who-we-are/partner-up/partnership-the-ryse-project/. David, Anda, Mohamed Ali Marouani, Charbel Nahas, and Björn Nilsson. 2020. “The Economics of the Syrian Refugee Crisis in Neighbouring Countries: The Case of Lebanon.”Economics of Transition and Institutional Change 28 (1): 89–109. https://www.jointdatacenter.org/literature_review/the-economics-of-the-syrian-refugee-crisis-in- neighbouring-countries-the-case-of-lebanon/. Dempster, Helen, Thomas Ginn, Jimmy Graham, Martha Guerrero Ble, Daphne Jayasinghe, and Barri Shorey. 2020. “Locked Down and Left Behind: The Impact of COVID-19 on Refugees’ Economic Inclusion.” Policy Paper 179, Center for Global Development and Refugees International, Washington. DC. https://reliefweb.int/sites/relief- web.int/files/resources/locked-down-left-behind-refugees-economic-inclusion-covid.pdf. Devereux, Stephen, Keetie Roelen, Ricardo Sabates, Dimitri Stoelinga, and Arnaud Dyevre. 2015. “Final Evaluation Report: Concern’s Graduation Model Program in Burundi.” Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK. Devictor, Xavier, and Quy-Toan Do. 2016. “How Many Years Do Refugees Spend in Exile?” Policy Research Paper 7810, World Bank, Washington, DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/549261472764700982/pdf/ WPS7810.pdf. Dutta, Puja Vasudeva, Jorge Avalos, Sarang Chaudhury, and Timothy Clay. 2021. “A Path to Jobs for the Urban Poor.” PEI In Practice, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/36594. Goga, Soraya, Makiko Watanabe, Swati Sachdeva, and Phoram Shah. 2022. “Forced Displacement: An Agenda for Cities and Towns.” World Bank, Washington, DC. Graham, Jimmy, and Sarah Miller. 2021. “From Displacement to Development: How Ethiopia Can Create Shared Growth by Facilitating Economic Inclusion of Refugees.” Case study, Center for Global Development, Washington, DC. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/506c8ea1e4b01d9450dd53f5/t/60c7959f83c9e3042 4d56695/1623692708140/Displacement-to-Development-How-Ethiopia-Can-Create-Shared-Growth.pdf. IDA (International Development Association). 2021. “IDA19 Mid-term Refugee Policy Review.” Development Fi- nance, Corporate IDA & IBRD (DFCII), World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curat- ed/en/826851636575674627/pdf/IDA19-Mid-Term-Refugee-Policy-Review.pdf. Krishnan, Nandini, Flavio Russo Riva, Dhiraj Sharma, and Tara Vishwanath. 2020. “Coping with the Influx: Service Delivery to Syrian Refugees and Hosts in Jordan, Lebanon and Kurdistan, Iraq.” Policy Research Working Paper 9326, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/doc- umentdetail/585111595352295241/coping-with-the-influx-service-delivery-to-syrian-refugees-and-hosts-in-jordan- lebanon-and-kurdistan-iraq. Limlim, Robert. 2022. “Advancing Economic Inclusion for Forcibly Displaced People.” Fragility Forum. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=XoeXmFjBS7o&t=3s. Lind, Jeremy, Rachel Sabates-Wheeler, and Carolina Szyp. 2022. “Cash and Livelihoods in Contexts of Conflict and Fragility: Implications for Social Assistance Programming.” Better Assistance in Crises Research, UK Aid. https:// opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/20.500.12413/17142/BASIC_Working_Paper_8.pdf?sequence=3&is- Allowed=y. Maystadt, Jean-François, Valerie Mueller, Jamon Van Den Hoek, and Stijn van Weezel. 2020. “Vegetation changes attributable to refugees in Africa coincide with agricultural deforestation.” Environmental Research Letters 15 044008. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6d7c/pdf. Müller, Angelika, Utz Pape, and Laura Ralston. 2019. “Broken Promises: Evaluating an Incomplete Cash Transfer Program.” Policy Research Working Paper 9016, World Bank, Washington, DC. Njenga, Mary, Abdon Awono, and Cathy Watson. 2021. “How to Build Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods in Refugee Settings.” Forest News. https://forestsnews.cifor.org/73009/how-to-build-resilient-landscapes-and-liveli- hoods-in-refugee-settings?fnl=e. Noble, Eva, Liliana Ascencio, Thomas Wilondja, Alays Mateba, Manuela Angelucci, and Rachel Heath. 2020. “The Impact of Women for Women International’s Economic and Social Empowerment Program in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” Women for Women International, Washington, DC. https://www.womenforwomen.org/sites/ default/files/2021-02/DRC8pger.pdf. Ogude,Helidah Refiloe Atieno. 2018. The Impact of Refugee Presence on Host Populations in Tanzania. A Desk Review. World Bank. Washington, D.C. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/458641529472508590/The- The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  53 impact-of-refugee-presence-on-host-populations-in-Tanzania-a-desk-review. Olivieri, Sergio, Francesc Ortega, Ana Rivadeneira, and Eliana Carranza. 2020. “The Labor Market Effects of Vene- zuelan Migration in Ecuador,” Policy Research Working Paper 9336, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://open- knowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34254. Pacheco, Peñaloza Leonardo. 2019. “Living with the Neighbors: The Effect of Venezuelan Forced Migration on Wages in Colombia.” Serie de Documentos de Trabajo del CEDLAS No. 248. https://www.jointdatacenter.org/literature_ review/living-with-the-neighbors-the-effect-of-venezuelan-forced-migration-on-wages-in-colombia/. Roelen, Keetie, and Amrita Saha. 2019. Fonkoze’s CLM Ultra Poverty Programme: Understanding and Improving Child Development and Child Well-being—Endline Report. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Rozo, Sandra, and Micaela Sviatschi. 2020. “Is a Refugee Crisis a Housing Crisis? Only If Housing Supply Is Un- responsive.” Journal of Development Economics 148: 102563. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0304387820301383. Salemi, Colette. 2021. Refugee camps and deforestation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Development Economics 152: 102682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102682. Schuettler, Kirsten, and Laura Caron. 2020. “Jobs Interventions for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons.” Jobs Working Paper Issue 47, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/han- dle/10986/33953/Jobs-Interventions-for-Refugees-and-Internally-Displaced-Persons.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y. Shamsuddin, Mrittika, Pablo Ariel Acosta, Rovane Battaglin Schwengber, Jedediah Fix, and Nikolas Pirani. 2021. “Integration of Venezuelan Refugees and Migrants in Brazil.” Policy Research Working Paper 9605, World Bank, Washington. DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35358. Simanowitz, Anton. 2019. Adapting the Graduation Approach for Refugees in Zambia. New York: Trickle Up. https:// refugees.trickleup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Adapting-Graduation-for-Refugees-in-Ecuador_Case-Study_ FINAL.pdf. Suzuki, Ken, Saumik Paul, Takeshi Maru, and Motoi Kusadokor. 2019. “An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Syr- ian Refugees on the Turkish Labor Market.” Working Paper No. 935, Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo. https://www.adb.org/publications/empirical-analysis-effects-syrian-refugees-turkish-labor-market. Swatton, Jenny. 2022. “Advancing Economic Inclusion for Forcibly Displaced People.” Fragility Forum. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=XoeXmFjBS7o&t=3s. Trickle Up. 2016. “Graduation Model Pilot Project 2014–2016.” UNHCR Costa Rica. https://refugees.trickleup.org/ wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2016_UNHCR_Costa_Rica_Final_Evaluation.pdf. UNDP Bangladesh and UN WOMEN Bangladesh. 2018. Report on Environmental Impact of Rohingya Influx. Dha- ka, Bangladesh. https://www.undp.org/content/dam/bangladesh/docs/Publications/Pub-2018/Updated/REIRI. pdf. UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2011. “UNHCR-NGO Toolkit for Practical Cooper- ation on Resettlement. Community Outreach–Outreach to Host Communities: Definitions and FAQs.” https:// www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/resettlement/4cd7d1509/unhcr-ngo-toolkit-practical-cooperation-resettle- ment-community-outreach.html. UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2014. “UNHCR Policy on Alternatives to Camps.” https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/statelessness/5422b8f09/unhcr-policy-alternatives-camps.html. UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2016. “UNHCR Viewpoint: ‘Refugee’ or ‘Migrant’— Which Is Right?” https://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/55df0e556/unhcr-viewpoint-refugee-migrant-right. html. UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2017. “Global Trends Forced Displacement in 2016.” UNHCR, Geneva. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/statistics/unhcrstats/5943e8a34/global-trends-forced-displace- ment-2016.ht. UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). 2022. “Global Trends Forced Displacement in 2021.” UNHCR, Geneva. https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021 Verme, Paolo, and Kirsten Schuettler. 2019. “The Impact of Forced Displacement on Host Communities: A Review of Empirical Literature in Economics.” Journal of Development Economics 150 (May): 102606. Wilson, Kim, and Krystalli Roxani. 2017. “The Financial Journey of Refugees: Evidence from Greece, Jordan, and Turkey.” Institute for Human Security, Fletcher School, Tufts University, Boston. https://fic.tufts.edu/publica- tion-item/financial-journey-of-refugees/. World Bank. 2014a. “Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project to the Republic of Chad.” Proj- ect Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  54 en/179061468215115488/pdf/PAD11010PAD0P1010Box385329B00OUO090.pdf. World Bank. 2014b. “Social Safety Net Project for Burkina Faso.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Wash- ington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/516971468016184394/pdf/PAD8930P124015010Box- 385166B00OUO090.pdf. World Bank. 2015a. “Mauritania Social Safety Net System.” Project Information Document, World Bank, Washing- ton, DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/724951468270008295/Project-Information-Document-Ap- praisal-Stage-Mauritania-Social-Safety-Net-System-. World Bank. 2015b. “Social Safety Net System Project to the Islamic Republic of Mauritania.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/395981468179329737/ pdf/PAD1185-PAD-P150430-IDA-R2015-0092-1-Box391434B-OUO-9.pdf. World Bank. 2016a. “Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project in the Horn of Africa.” Proj- ect Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/384311467996731135/pdf/PAD1678-PAD-P152822-IDA-R2016-0090-1-Box394886B-OUO-9.pdf. World Bank. 2016b. “Project Paper for an Additional Loan to the Republic of Azerbaijan for the IDP Living Standards and Livelihoods Projects.” World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/603601468197957929/pdf/Azerbaijan-IDP-Living-Standards-and-Livelihoods-Project-additional-financing.pdf. World Bank. 2016c. “Project Paper to the Federal Republic of Nigeria for Youth Employment and Social Support Operation.” World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/876291468197102279/ pdf/PAD1826-PJPR-P126964-P157899-IDA-R2016-0123-1-Box396259B-OUO-9.pdf. World Bank. 2017a. “Cities of Refuge in the Middle East: Bringing an Urban Lens to the Forced Displacement Challenge.” Policy Note, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/han- dle/10986/28901/121515-PN-PUBLIC-FINALCITIESOFREFUGEURBANLENS.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y. World Bank. 2017b. “Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) In the Horn of Afri- ca.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/598591493431258373/pdf/Kenya-Hon-Africa-PAD-04072017.pdf. World Bank. 2017c. Forcibly Displaced: Toward a Development Approach Supporting Refugees, the Internally Displaced, and Their Hosts. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/25016. World Bank. 2017d. “Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for Northeastern Nigeria.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/720891490278540329/pdf/final-Proj- ect-Appraisal-Document-PAD-P157891-2017-03-06-15-07-03092017.pdf. World Bank. 2017e. “Yemen Smallholder Agricultural Productivity Restoration and Enhancement Project.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/173291503381695317/pdf/PAD2319-PAD-P162659-PUBLIC-for-RVP-FINAL-CL.pdf. World Bank. 2018. “Niger Refugees and Host Communities Support Project.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/504891536982246418/pdf/NI- GER-PAD-08232018.pdf. World Bank. 2019a. “Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project in the Horn of Africa.” Interna- tional Development Association Project Paper, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank. org/curated/en/347371555812093462/pdf/Uganda-Development-Response-to-Displacement-Impacts-Proj- ect-in-the-Horn-of-Africa-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2019b. “IDP Living Standards and Livelihoods Projects for the Republic of Azerbaijan.” Implemen- tation Completion Report Review, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/728421610494362837/pdf/Azerbaijan-IDP-Living-Standards-and-Livelihoods.pdf. World Bank. 2019c. “Implementation Completion and Results Report of the Federal Republic of Nigeria’s Youth Employment and Social Support Operation.” World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/ curated/en/668361626694707304/pdf/Nigeria-Youth-Employment-Social-Support-Operation.pdf. World Bank. 2019d. “Socio-Economic Inclusion of Refugees and Host Communities in Rwanda Project.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/222811556935409836/pdf/Rwanda-Socio-Economic-Inclusion-of-Refugees-and-Host-Communities-in-Rwan- da-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2020a. “Agricultural Employment Support for Refugees and Turkish Citizens Through Enhanced Mar- ket Linkages.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/ curated/en/671481617301015363/pdf/Turkey-Agricultural-Employment-Support-for-Refugees-and-Turkish-Citi- zens-through-Enhanced-Market-Linkages-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2020b. “COVID-19 to Add as Many as 150 million Extreme Poor by 2021.” Press release, World Bank, The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  55 Washington, DC. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/10/07/covid-19-to-add-as-many-as-150- million-extreme-poor-by-2021#:~:text=The%20COVID%2D19%20pandemic%20is,severity%20of%20the%20econom- ic%20contraction. World Bank. 2020c. “Formal Employment Creation Project for Turkey.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/211181585965751622/pdf/Turkey-Formal-Employ- ment-Creation-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2020d. “Integrated Community Development Project to the Republic of Burundi.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/644221583204472551/ pdf/Burundi-Integrated-Community-Development-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2020e. “Mauritania Social Safety Net System.” Implementation Status and Results Report, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/144461584526136252/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of- the-ISR-Mauritania-Social-Safety-Net-System-P150430-Sequence-No-10.pdf. World Bank. 2020f. “Nigeria Youth Employment and Social Support Operation.” Implementation Completion Report, World Bank, Washington DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/846921635527372969/pdf/ Nigeria-NG-Youth-Employment-Soc-Support-Operat.pdf. World Bank. 2020g. “Nigeria Youth Employment and Social Support Operation.” Implementation Status and Results Report, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/462821604958218723/pdf/ Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Nigeria-Youth-Employment-Social-Support-Operation-P126964-Sequence-No-14. pdf. World Bank. 2020h. “The Long-Term Consequences of Forced Displacement.” World Bank–UNHCR Joint Data Center on Forced Displacement (JDC) Quarterly Digest (July). https://www.jointdatacenter.org/wp-content/up- loads/2020/12/Quarterly-Digest_July-2020_Final.pdf. World Bank. 2021a. “Burundi: Cash for Jobs Projects to the Republic.” Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/768621641923064747/pdf/Burundi-Cash-for-Jobs- Project.pdf. World Bank. 2021b. “Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) In the Horn of Africa.” Implementation Status and Results Report (September), World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1. worldbank.org/curated/en/776791632837003293/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Development-Response-to- Displacement-Impacts-Project-DRDIP-in-the-Horn-of-Africa-P161067-Sequence-No-09.pdf. World Bank. 2021c. “Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project to the Republic of Chad.” Implementa- tion Completion and Results Report, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/198781610768290409/pdf/Chad-Emergency-Food-and-Livestock-Crisis-Response-Project.pdf. World Bank. 2021d. “Niger Refugees and Host Communities Support Project.” Implementation Status and Results Report (April), World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/604781621504955592/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Refugees-and-Host-Communities-Support- Project-P164563-Sequence-No-06.pdf. World Bank. 2021e. “Niger Refugees and Host Communities Support Project.” Implementation Status and Results Report (November), World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/197431637264690159/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Refugees-and-Host-Communities-Support- Project-P164563-Sequence-No-07.pdf. World Bank. 2021f. “Productive Safety Nets and Jobs Project for Burundi.” Project Information Document, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/983481613494861842/pdf/Concept-Proj- ect-Information-Document-PID-Productive-Safety-Nets-and-Jobs-Project-P175327.pdf. World Bank. 2021g. “Smallholder Agricultural Production Restoration and Enhancement Project for the Republic of Yemen.” Implementation Status and Results Report (June), World Bank, Washington, DC. https://documents1. worldbank.org/curated/en/569311625077671168/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Smallholder-Agricultur- al-Production-Restoration-and-Enhancement-Project-P162659-Sequence-No-08.pdf. World Bank. 2021h. “Turkey: Employment Support Project for Syrians under Temporary Protection and Host Com- munities.” Project Information Document, World Bank, Washington DC. https://documents.worldbank.org/pt/ publication/documents-reports/documentlist?qterm=P161670. Zhou, Yang-Yang; Guy Grossman; Shuning Ge. 2022. “Inclusive Refugee-Hosting in Uganda Improves Local Develop- ment and Prevents Public Backlash.” Policy Research Working Paper 9981, World Bank, Washington, DC. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/37209 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Working for Inclusion: Economic Inclusion in Contexts of Forced Displacement   |  56 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion (PEI) is a global partnership with a mission to support the adoption of national economic inclusion programs that increase the earnings and assets of extremely poor and vulnerable households. PEI brings together global stakeholders to catalyze country-level innovation, advance innovation and learning, and share global knowledge. PEI is hosted by the Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice of the World Bank. In Practice