SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN CRISIS ANALYSIS 2018 December 2017

Transcription

1 SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN CRISIS ANALYSIS 2018 December 2017 Each year, Sida conducts a humanitarian allocation exercise in which a large part of its humanitarian budget is allocated to emergencies worldwide. This allocation takes place at the beginning of the year as to ensure predictability for humanitarian organizations and to allow for best possible operational planning. In an effort to truly adhere to the humanitarian principles Sida bases its allocation decisions on a number of objective indicators of which the most important are related to the number of affected people, vulnerability of affected people and level of funding in previous years. One of the indicators is also related to forgotten crises in order to ensure sufficient funding also to low profile crises. Besides this initial allocation, another part of the humanitarian budget is set aside as an emergency reserve for sudden onset emergencies and deteriorating humanitarian situations. This reserve allows Sida to quickly allocate funding to any humanitarian situation throughout the year, including additional funding to South Sudan. For 2018, the South Sudan crisis is allocated Million Swedish Kroner (MSEK). Close monitoring on the situation of the South Sudan crisis will follow throughout the year to determine whether additional funds should be allocated. 1. CRISIS OVERVIEW 1.1. Introduction to the Crisis The world s youngest nation South Sudan, which got its independence in 2011, has since 2013 been engulfed in a brutal civil conflict with ethnic dimensions and an accompanying humanitarian crisis which has expanded and intensified year by year. The humanitarian crisis has by now reached unprecedented proportions, affecting all parts of the country as well as neighbouring states. During 2017 South Sudan has become the source of the fastest-growing refugee population in the world. Two years after independence, in December 2013, conflict broke out between the forces of president, Salva Kiir (SPLM), and the ex-vice president Riek Machar (SPLM in Opposition - SPLM-IO). The conflict quickly spread to Unity, Jonglei and Upper Nile states. During 2014 several rounds of IGAD-led peace negotiations had limited success. However, in August 2015, a new peace and power sharing agreement was signed by the warring parties and a few months later a Transitional Government of National Unity was formed. Despite the peace agreement, violence continued to affect civilians, causing deep suffering and severe humanitarian needs in many parts of the country. The conflict was further aggravated by the heavy fighting that broke out in the capital of Juba in July Although the hostilities only lasted for four days, it had a profound effect on the political situation in the country and caused huge economic disruption. The fighting now spread across the country, affecting states that had until then been relatively stable, particularly the three Equatorial states. The Juba-incident also resulted in Riek Machar fleeing to South Africa, where he is still in exile. In addition to the two main warring parties, new opposition/armed groups have been formed such as the National Salvation Front led by a former general of SPLA. Others are more localized such as the Maban Defence Forces (MDF) and the White Army in Upper Nile and Arrow Boys in Equatoria. After Machar s departure the number of armed rebel groups have increased drastically as groups have split up into different factions, resulting in a growing fragmentation of the conflict which will most likely have a negative impact on possible peace efforts. During 2017 some initiatives have been taken to end the conflict and restore peace a process of National Dialogue is ongoing, and the most recent initiative is an IGAD-led initiative aimed at revitalizing the peace process and developing a new timeframe for it. Despite the different initiatives, there is generally little hope for a solution of the conflict in the foreseeable future. Regarding cross-border implications, there are many links with the ongoing conflict in Sudan. The Juba-crisis led to a huge escalation of displacement and by November 2017 approx. 4 million people were displaced inside and outside the country. In February 2017 famine was declared in two counties, but as a result of massive humanitarian assistance, the famine situation was officially declared over by July the same year. 1

2 Generally, severe food insecurity has continued to increase for the fifth consecutive year, and a record-high 6 million people about half the population of the country - were severely food insecure in mid-year The drop in oil prices and the large expenditures related to the conflict have led to extreme inflation rates, where the country s economy is on the verge of a collapse Geographical areas and affected population Prior to the present conflict, South Sudan was one of the poorest countries in the world, with at least 80 % of the 12-million population defined as income-poor and living on the equivalent of less than US$1 per day. The country is young with two-thirds of the population under the age of 30. Only 27 per cent of the population aged 15 years and above can read and write (female literacy being only 16 %). Civilians are most affected by the conflict and have been systematically targeted by armed forces. People have lost their homes and livelihoods, and schools, hospitals and other infrastructure have been damaged, looted, destroyed or occupied. In November 2017, more than 4 million people, a third of the population, have had to flee their homes. Almost 1.9 million are internally displaced persons (IDPs) spread across the country, while some 2.1 million have crossed into Uganda, Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya. After the Juba crisis, Uganda has been the biggest recipient of refugees, mainly people from the Equatorian states, and by mid-2017 the number of refugees in Uganda surpassed 1 million. More than 80 % of the refugees in Uganda are women and children. In addition, South Sudan itself currently hosts almost 279,000 refugees, the vast majority from Sudan. Until the Juba crises, the most acute needs were experienced in the three original conflict states (Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile). The emergency needs have now spread to all ten states with a worsening humanitarian situation as a consequence. In addition to the original conflict states, the Equatorian states are heavily affected by conflict. Inter-communal fighting, including cattle raids, has caused peaks in tension and displacement in areas of Western Equatoria, Lakes and Jonglei. Most parts of the country continue to be affected by food insecurity, disease outbreaks, malnutrition and spill-over effects of the conflict. Landmines and unexploded ordnances pose a constant threat of injury or death to the civilian population and humanitarian workers. Women, girls, and young boys are particularly vulnerable, as are people who have fled their homes. Elderly and disabled people are moreover consistently amongst the most vulnerable, as they are often unable to flee in advance of fighting or move in search for food. Around 210,000 people have sought refuge in Protection of Civilians (PoC) sites inside UNMISS bases, living in overcrowded and insecure conditions. The majority, approx. 90 % the IDPs, are spread around the country, hosted by the communities or hiding in remote areas which are not easily accessible with assistance and services. Competition for scarce resources, in some areas, has led to tensions between displaced and host communities, further aggravating the situation. Gender inequality and gender-based violence (GBV) permeate the entire society and has been exacerbated by the conflict. GBV is commonly used as a weapon of war and, according to UN Women, the deliberate targeting of girls and women has reached unprecedented, epidemic and systematic proportions. Reported cases of forced/early child marriage, abductions and sexual slavery are increasing. Women and girls are also facing rape and other forms of violence, including inside and in close proximity to the PoCs, and when trying to access humanitarian assistance. Many boys and young men are being recruited into armed groups. In the absence of livelihood opportunities, some are also encouraged by their families to join armed forces and groups. Nearly 20,000 children (up from 17,000 in 2016) are estimated to have been recruited or forcefully taken as child soldiers. In addition, about 16,000 unaccompanied, separated or missing children have been registered in South Sudan since December Destruction of schools and departure of teachers from many affected areas mean that access to education is severely impacted, with 2 million school-aged children not enrolled in primary school, and the learner-teacher ratio averages 150:1. According to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) analysis published in November 2017, hunger and malnutrition have reached unprecedented levels compared with all previous periods. Malnutrition rates are high across the country, however they are particularly high in areas most conflict by affected areas, as well as more stable areas in the north of the country such as Northern Bahr el Ghazal and Warrap, where chronic food insecurity contributes to malnutrition rates well above the emergency threshold of 15 %. In 2017, food insecurity in these areas remained critical as spikes of conflict and impacts 2

3 of flooding reduced agricultural production. The conflict in Greater Equatoria, traditionally regarded the bread basket of the country, has resulted in huge numbers of farmers leaving the country or not being able to harvest and replant for the next season. About three quarters of the counties countrywide (5.1 million people) are expected to face severe food insecurity in the first quarter of 2018 of which 1.52 million people are projected to be in in IPC phase 4, i.e. on the brink of famine, and by mid-2018 this is forecasted to increase to 6 million people. In September 2017 pockets of famine-like conditions existed in Jonglei, Western Bahr el Ghazal and Eastern Equatoria. In 2018 there are high risks for localized famine (IPC Phase 5) affecting thousands of people in several locations in the country. More than 1.1 million children under the age five are forecasted to be acutely malnourished in 2018, and in need of life-saving nutrition services. As the nutrition situation has worsened since the conflict began, it means that an increasing number of children are suffering from prolonged malnutrition. Their survival is becoming locked in a cycle of recurring illness and faltering growth, with irreversible damage to their development and cognitive abilities. South Sudan has one of the world s highest maternal mortality rates (2,054 per 100,000 live births before the crisis) and only 17 % of children are fully immunized. Other recurrent, often endemic, threats to people s health include cholera, malaria, kala-azar, guinea worm, acute respiratory infections, acute watery diarrhoea, and measles. Malaria is the leading cause of death from disease, more than 77,500 people are affected every week, most of them children under the age of five. In 2017, South Sudan has seen the longest running cholera outbreak in its history, which began in June 2016 and, although showing signs of decline, is expected to continue well into Destruction of health care facilities, attacks on health care workers and shortages of drugs and skilled professionals means that access to health is increasingly sparse and reduced Critical Assumptions, risks and threats In Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) meetings it has been assessed that the protracted humanitarian crisis in South Sudan is likely to become larger than ever in Key threats identified for 2018 are: conflict and violence, malnutrition and famine, economic decline, and diseases. The cumulative and compounding effects of widespread violence and sustained economic decline have gradually diminished the coping capacity of people to face threats to their health, safety and livelihoods and more people are expected to flee the country in the coming year as coping capacities diminish further and get exhausted. In the worst-case scenario, the lean season will reignite famine conditions in multiple locations across the country if urgent humanitarian assistance is not provided. It is also crucial that humanitarian funding is allocated early in the year so that humanitarian agencies will be able to procure and pre-position sufficient supplies before the rainy season starts in May. Considering that the conflict has spread drastically since July 2016, with a larger number of armed groups engaged in fighting, and the fact that criminality around the country has risen drastically, the humanitarian situation is expected to decline further. Communal violence is also expected to intensify in the dry season (November-April) as resource related conflicts over pasture, water and cattle will continue. If there will be an upsurge in violence, humanitarian organizations are likely to become even more exposed to threats and interference, risking to limit humanitarian access and operations further. In the worst case, it could affect the presence of international organizations as it did at the outbreak of violence in Juba in July 2016, leading to evacuation of staff. With continued insecurity there are small possibilities for the displaced population to return to their place of origin in the foreseeable future. This will affect neighbouring countries and the direct refugee response in these countries. In Uganda, which currently hosts the largest number of refugees, it is important that the international community continues its efforts together with the Ugandan government to create sustainable livelihoods for the refugees and their host communities (see further in sections 3.3 and 3.5). As for gender inequality and the GBV situation in the country, it is important that the humanitarian community continues to further increase its efforts to mainstream and address these issues across sectoral operations. It is also important that the operational work is sensitive to conflict dynamics and conflict patterns since distribution of aid e.g. could attract armed groups, which would increase vulnerability and exposure of civilians. 3

4 South Sudan is considered one of the most corrupt countries in the world and currently ranks as 179 out of 180 countries in Transparency Internationals corruption perceptions index for There is generally a high risk of corruption within humanitarian programming and in-country support Strategic Objectives and Priorities of the Country Humanitarian Response Plan The three strategic objectives in the 2018 South Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) are to: 1) Save lives by providing timely and integrated multi-sector lifesaving assistance to reduce acute needs among the most vulnerable people; 2) Reinforce protection and promote access to basic services for the displaced and other vulnerable people; and 3) Support at-risk communities to sustain their capacity to cope with significant threats. Recognizing that South Sudan is first and foremost a protection crisis, the centrality of protection is emphasized throughout all aspects of the HRP. The total requirement of the HRP is USD1.7 billion. Of estimated 7 million people in need of assistance and protection during 2018, aid organizations aim to reach the 6 million people in most acute need across the country. The humanitarian response will address lifethreatening needs across the country, focusing on protection, health, nutrition, livelihoods, water and sanitation and distribution of shelter and Non-Food Items (NFIs). 2. IN COUNTRY HUMANITARIAN CAPACITIES 2.1. National and local capacities and constraints The national response capacity is extremely limited. The Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and the South Sudan Relief and Recovery Commission (SSRRC) are coordinating bodies for humanitarian issues on the government side. South Sudan is one of the logistically most challenging operating environments in the world, and thereby also one of the most expensive humanitarian interventions. The basic infrastructure is severely underdeveloped and roads become impassable during six months of the year when it is rainy season. Pre-positioning of relief items in field hubs during the dry season is essential to maintain a steady supply during the season. Insecurity, poor road conditions, rains and displaced people spreading across large areas greatly increases the demand for air transport, with substantially increased operational costs. Due to these conditions, South Sudan is one of the few places in the world where WFP regularly drops food by air to displaced people. According to ICRC, the level of cost-efficiency of aid operations in South Sudan is the lowest of all humanitarian crises. Since the conflict started, and significantly accentuated after the July-crisis 2016, access to the affected population has been challenging (particularly in opposition-held areas), with looting of aid supplies, attacks on and harassment of aid workers and bureaucratic impediments and fees imposed by government and conflicting parties. At present there are e.g. discussions between the government and humanitarian agencies about a raised work permit fee (from 100 USD to 4,000 USD) which, if enforced, would have a significant impact on the costs of humanitarian assistance. During 2017 there has also been an increasing trend of state and county governments imposing illegal fees on aid organizations. There is little respect for International Humanitarian Law, and impunity is common. The safety and security of aid workers tend to be ignored by all parties, bringing the total to 95 aid workers killed since the conflict started (27 during 2017) a larger number than in any other conflict. Many others have been abducted, harassed, detained or arrested. The recent crisis has greatly disrupted an already weak service delivery system. Basic services in conflictaffected areas or locations with high concentrations of displaced people are almost exclusively provided by humanitarian organizations. South Sudan s health sector is extremely underdeveloped and it is estimated that a maximum of 43 % of the country s health facilities remain functional. Due to extremely low salary levels and delays or failure of government to pay salaries, skilled professionals tend to join the humanitarian sector. As mentioned earlier, the situation in the education sector is similar. 4

5 Widespread violence and continuous economic decline have gradually diminished the coping capacity of people and have meant that people remain on the move, continuing to leave behind farms and livelihoods to secure access to food. Alarming gaps in food in many parts of the country have led to people resorting to use savings or selling productive assets, such as animals, seeds or land, as well as surviving on wild fruits and leaves. Economic desperation has also resulted in more families seeking to ease hardships with dowry payments from forced and early child marriages. In general, the capacity of civil society in the country is relatively weak. Of the 330 NNGOs registered in the country, 95 are delivering services in accordance with the HRP. NNGOs are often essential for providing assistance in deep field, hard-to-reach areas. South Sudanese staff forms the backbone of the humanitarian response - of the 23,000 humanitarian NGO-workers in the country, more than 90 % are local. Civil society actors and NNGOs have been severely hampered by the crisis, with lootings and destruction of property as well as staff having to flee from their homes and from the country International operational capacities and constraints The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), led by the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), is composed of UN agencies, representatives of international and national NGOs, and humanitarian donors. Coordination among the humanitarian partners takes place within the different clusters and in the HCT. The clusters are co-chaired by the different UN-organizations and implementing NGOs, which is a strength in the coordination. The South Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SSHF) is managed by OCHA and allocates funding to all types of humanitarian actors in the country. It is particularly an important instrument for funding of national NGOs. During 2017, Sweden has had a place on the Advisory Board of the fund. In this capacity and considering the decreasing donor allocations in recent years, it has been a priority of Sweden to support OCHA in its efforts to attract new donors to the fund. Other priorities include accountability, prioritisation around the SSHF allocation process, gender, protection, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). Sweden has also been nominated to continue in the Advisory Board of SSHF in Today there are some 61 INGOs and 11 UN entities operating emergency programmes across the country. The leadership and the overall humanitarian coordination have generally worked quite well throughout the crisis, but decision making is still very Juba-centred. Many relief agencies are carrying out mobile and rapid interventions with limited duration (so called Rapid Response Mechanism RRM approach) in hard to reach areas where longer term presence is difficult. Increased administrative impediments such as visas and work permits, flying permissions and security checkpoints for road transports continue to be a difficult problem especially for INGOs. During the last couple of years, due to the financial crisis, criminality in Juba has increased severely, with almost daily attempts of compound robberies or other criminal incidents directed towards humanitarian actors International and Regional assistance As of 31 October 2017, the HRP for South Sudan was funded by 66 % which equalled about USD1.1 million. USAID, DFID (UK), Germany and ECHO are the largest humanitarian donors in South Sudan, the main part of USA and ECHO s assistance being food aid. Other funders include Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, Japan, Australia, Sweden, Norway and Switzerland. The UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) is also a major funding source. In October 2017, the US ambassador to the UN visited South Sudan whereby the US issued a strong warning to president Kiir that if not measures were taken to try to stop the violence, the US would reconsider its financial support to the country Access Situation As outlined in previous sections, there are multiple challenges to humanitarian access in the country due to a number of reasons, including conflict and violence, poor infrastructure, flooding, criminality and bureaucratic impediments and restrictions by government and other conflict parties. During 2017, a much larger part of the country has been affected by limitations in access in addition to the original conflict states with persistent levels of insecurity, the fighting that broke out in the Equatorial states and parts of Western Bahr el Ghazal during the year have dramatically affected the possibilities for access by humanitarian agencies. In Greater Upper Nile, many displaced people are hiding in remote areas, swamps and on islands which makes it difficult 5

6 to reach them with assistance, and in the Greater Equatorias many areas have extremely limited accessibility. OCHA in fact remarks that there are great uncertainties on the exact situation on the ground, and how many people are still left in the Equatorias. Inter-communal violence in primarily Lakes, Western Bahr el Ghazal and Jonglei also has consequences for where aid can be delivered. To manage these restrictions, humanitarian aid agencies are continuously engaged in negotiations and access can sometimes be negotiated for a limited time-frame when humanitarian assistance rapidly can be brought in. The use of food drops by air, with rapid response teams deployed in advance, are important ways of trying to manage the access restrictions. In many cases local NGOs including the South Sudan Red Cross, are the only organizations with access in remote and/or conflict-affected parts of the country. 3. SIDAs HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE PLAN 3.1. The role of Sida Sida s humanitarian response in 2017, both inside and outside the country, has focused on support to SSHF, ICRC, Swedish Red Cross/South Sudan Red Cross (SRC/SSRC), OCHA, Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), International Rescue Committee (IRC), Church of Sweden (CoS), the Swedish Mission Council (SMC), Action Contre la Faim (ACF), FAO, UNICEF and UNHCR. Sweden is one of the top-ten humanitarian donors in South Sudan and plays an active role in coordination and dialogue with the broader humanitarian community. Through support to the NGO Forum, Sweden has also closely followed developments on the security situation and issues such as the bureaucratic impediments, together with other donors and the UN Response Priorities 2018 Humanitarian Focus: Sida s humanitarian assistance should focus on life-saving support in all essential sectors incl. protection, food security, nutrition, health, WASH, livelihood and education. Geographical priorities will be in line with the priorities of the HRP, and prioritized groups should be the most vulnerable people who are affected by displacement and/or severe food insecurity and malnutrition. Protection should be at the centre of every intervention and special attention shall be placed on responses to GBV and gender mainstreaming in all interventions. Coordinated multi-sectoral response is prioritized, and conflict sensitivity and the do-no-harm principle must be essential considerations in all programming. Field follow-up: During 2018 the humanitarian response through local NGOs will be a priority for follow-up, including SSHF-partners and SSRC. During field visits, Sida will furthermore focus on possibilities for cooperation between Swedish partner organizations, as well as possible synergies between Swedish development and humanitarian assistance Partners The proposed amount to be initially allocated from Sida s humanitarian budget for the South Sudan crisis 2018 is MSEK. This also includes South Sudan regional response to Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya and Sudanas well as 22 MSEK has been set aside in 2018 for multi-year resilience focused funding for ACF s and CoS refugee response in the region. On top of this, the HCAs for Ethiopia and Sudan includes funding that to some extent includes refugees from South Sudan. As a comparison, the initial allocation for 2017 was 150 MSEK, of which one third was allocated for the regional refugee response. At the end of 2017, the total amount for the South Sudan crisis had reached almost 300 MSEK, of which the regional response equalled almost 120 MSEK. The additional regional funds during 2017 were mainly allocated for the high influx of refugees in Uganda, while a large part of the additional funds to South Sudan itself were designated for the famine crisis. Support to the crisis inside South Sudan Seven framework agreement partners have included South Sudan in their initial submission for 2018 (of which six were funded during 2017), and for 2018 Sida proposes to fund all seven. In addition, Sida proposes to support OCHA, SSHF and UNICEF in South Sudan, as well as ICRC. 6

7 Action Contre la Faim (ACF): The organization has applied for 7 MSEK for a continuation of its integrated nutrition and WASH assistance in Northern Bahr-el Ghazal. ACF will focus on vulnerable communities, specifically targeting malnourished children under five and pregnant and lactating women. Sida recommends support with the requested 7 MSEK for Church of Sweden (CoS): Sida has supported CoS refugee programme in East Africa, implemented by the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), for the past four years which includes a number of countries in the region (see below). CoS proposes continued support in the refugee camps of Maban and Ajoung Thok in Upper Nile and Unity states during The components of the CoS programme, are child protection, education and support to children and youth with disabilities. Sida recommends a continued support of 10 MSEK for International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): ICRC is one of the largest responders to the crisis in South Sudan. In 2017, Sida s initial support to ICRC was 15 MSEK this was later revised to 29 MSEK. The main focus of ICRC activities relates to promotion of International Humanitarian Law, family-links services, food security, water and sanitation, as well as access to health care and other basic services. Sida recommends continued support of 20 MSEK in 2018 due to the ICRCs unique possibilities for access to difficult areas. Islamic Relief (IR): IR is a new organization for Sida support in the country, and intends to work in Wau (Western Bahr el Ghazal) and Yei and Lainya (Central Equatoria).These areas are hard to reach and underserved with high humanitarian needs. Multisectoral support is proposed in WASH, Food security, Health and Nutrition and special focus will be placed on SGBV in all interventions. Sida recommends support with 6.5 MSEK for International Rescue Committee (IRC): IRC proposes continued support from Sida for its provision of rapid health- and GBV integrated assistance in Central Equatoria and Unity. The work targets vulnerable women and girls in selected IDP/PoC-sites and the surrounding communities, including mobile GBV emergency response. Part of the response is also community outreach and training, including sensitization of men and boys on sexual violence. Sida finds the work highly relevant and recommends continued support with 8 MSEK. Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC): NRC works across South Sudan since many years with multisectoral response, incl. food security, education, protection, water and sanitation and livelihoods, and is known for responding in hard-to-reach areas. In 2017 NRC was supported with 10 MSEK for its regular programme in South Sudan. NRC will for 2018 primarily IDPs and some host populations. Based on NRC s initial submission, Sida recommends a continued support with 14 MSEK in Swedish Mission Council (SMC): SMC s partner IAS has had a long presence in the country within the WASH sector. The proposed projects in 2018 are located in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, Jonglei and Western- and Central Equatoria. For 2018, SMC also proposes emergency food assistance and livelihood support through PMU/ACROSS in Central and Eastern Equatoria. The work of both partners is highly relevant, and Sida therefore recommends support with 11 MSEK in Swedish Red Cross (SRC): In 2017 Sida supported the SRC in South Sudan with 4.5 MSEK where a major part of the activities was directed towards the South Sudan Red Cross (SSRC). For 2018, Sida recommends that 4.9 MSEK be allocated for organizational development of SSRC, SRC s country programme manager and SRC s emergency response which is complimentary to the broader support by the Red Cross movement in the country. OCHA is carrying out important work in regard of coordination, both between humanitarian partners and supporting the Humanitarian Coordinator in dialogue with the South Sudanese authorities. OCHA has also been instrumental in streamlining the procedures around the SSHF, including efforts on cluster coordination. Sida proposes a continued allocation of 5 MSEK to OCHA South Sudan. 7

8 SSHF (South Sudan Humanitarian Fund): The main channel for Sweden s support is proposed to be the SSHF to which Sweden was the third largest donor in Sida allocated 38 MSEK to the fund in 2017, which later grew to 73 MSEK. Support to SSHF will allow Sweden to fund the most prioritized and urgent areas, and to supporting national NGOs, who might be the only ones able to operate in hard to reach areas. Sida proposes an allocation of 48 MSEK for UNICEF is an important humanitarian actor in the country with multisector response to affected children. Sida has good experiences from collaboration with UNICEF and recommends increased support of 14 MSEK for To be noted is also that Sida s Unit for Peace and Conflict recently has decided to support a regional programme on Protection of Children in Armed Conflict, where approx. 8.5 MSEK will be allocated to UNICEF in South Sudan during the coming two years. Regional support to the South Sudan crisis: The neighbouring countries of Uganda, Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya, and to a smaller extent DRC and CAR today host more than 2 million South Sudanese refugees. Out of a total refugee population in Uganda of 1.4 million, 1 million come from South Sudan, making it the largest refugee-hosting country in Africa. In Sudan, which prior to the July-crisis in 2016 hosted the biggest number of refugees from South Sudan, the number is approx. 455,000 refugees (mid-october 2017) while the number in Ethiopia is approx. 411,000 and in Kenya 111,000. Even though the influx of refugees has decreased compared to the months following the Juba-crisis, refugees continue arriving in neighbouring countries and by the end of 2018 UNHCR estimates that there will be 3.1 million South Sudanese refugees in the region. The inter-agency South Sudan Regional Refugee Response Plan (RRRP) 2018 is led and coordinated by UNHCR with the involvement of some 72 UN agencies and NGO partners. The financial requirements for the 2018 RRRP are estimated to 1.5 billion USD to meet the minimum needs of the refugees in the region. As the situation in South Sudan does not show any signs of improvement, it is not foreseen that people will return to the country on any significant scale in the near future. All the neighbouring countries are upholding exemplary asylum policies, but are increasingly strained by the relentless pace of the influx. While refugee food assistance needs have increased greatly, drastic cuts are forced by funding shortfalls. In 2017, the budget for RRRP was only funded by 32 %. Access to land, water and basic services is furthermore becoming scarcer, sparking tensions with host communities. Particularly in Uganda, there is continuous work and innovative initiatives to improve the conditions for refugees and, to some extent, the host communities. Within the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF), the Ugandan government and humanitarian- and developments partners are collaborating to develop more sustainable livelihoods for the populations. To respond to the Ugandan refugee situation, Sida has at a few occasions during both 2016 and 2017 added considerable funding to UNHCR and NGO partners. Sida proposes the following allocation for regional support to the South Sudan Crisis in 2018 (see also section 3.4): UNHCR: During 2017 Sida allocated an initial amount of 15 MSEK to UNHCR for the RRRP, which later in the year was doubled to 30 MSEK. Given the continued critical situation, Sida proposes to increase the initial allocation to UNHCR to 28 MSEK. With this unearmarked support, UNHCR is free to prioritize refugee response in the whole region. CoS Kenya: Sida has supported LWF s multi-sector work in the refugee camps of Dadaab and Kakuma during the past four years. This work is directed towards refugees from both South Sudan and Somalia. For 2018, Sida recommends continued support with 5 MSEK. CoS Sudan: In line with the multi-year HRP for Sudan, CoS has proposed a two-year multi-sector intervention through NCA in South Kardofan and South Darfur. Sida finds that the proposal is in line with criteria A for multi-year funding and recommends that 5.7 MSEK is set aside for the project, where 3.4 MSEK is allocated for

9 NRC Uganda: Sida allocated 8 MSEK to NRC in mid-year For 2018, Sida recommends continued support to NRC with 8 MSEK for multisector refugee response. SMC Uganda: During 2017, Sida initially allocated 7 MSEK for SMC s work in Uganda which was later increased to 11.5 MSEK. For 2018, Sida proposes a continued support of 9.6 MSEK for multisector interventions implemented by IAS and ADRA. It should be mentioned that Sida allocated a small amount of 2.5 MSEK to FAO during 2017 for its refugee work within the food security sector in Uganda. Considering that the Swedish embassy in Uganda is currently preparing a five-year development programme with FAO (approx. 76 MSEK) which partly will be targeting the refugee populations, Sida will not allocate any further funding to FAO at this point in time Strategic Funding in Protracted Crises (regional support) Sida supports multi-year humanitarian interventions with one of the following purposes: A) humanitarian assistance in protracted crises, in line with multi-year Humanitarian Response Plan (only in contexts with multi-year humanitarian planning); B) transition/phase out of humanitarian assistance (handing over to development and national/local actors according to a proposed plan within a specific time-frame); C) humanitarian assistance in specifically hard-to-reach areas. Based on the observation that in many of today s humanitarian contexts, few actors tend to have access to those with the greatest needs, Sida would like to encourage partners to build strong and durable relations with concerned stakeholders in a view to facilitate swift and efficient access also to areas considered more challenging to reach. ACF Uganda: Sida has supported ACF in Uganda with 7 MSEK during ACF has now presented a proposal for a three-year multisectoral project in Uganda. The intervention will enable refugees to move away from humanitarian aid dependency and build, with them, sustainable solutions in collaboration with the District and refugee hosting Subcounties. The specific objective is to increase access to nutritious food through economic empowerment of women and young people in Adjumani and Kiryandongo settlements, including host communities. Sida assesses that the proposed intervention is highly relevant and in line with Sida s criteria for multiyear resilience focused funding (criteria B). The project should therefore be supported with 24 MSEK for , where 9 MSEK is allocated for CoS Ethiopia: CoS has presented a three-year multisector project in Ethiopia to phase out LWF s refugee support in the regions of Gambella and Assosa. The proposal is in line with Sida s criteria for multi-year resilience focused funding (criteria B) and Sida therefore recommends support with 12 MSEK during , where 4 MSEK will be allocated for CoS Uganda: CoS has presented a proposal for a three-year multisectoral project in Uganda with the aim to phase out LWF s refugee support in both Rwamwanja and Adjumani settlements by Support will also be provided to refugees in Lamwo district. Sida assesses that the proposed intervention is highly relevant and in line with Sida s criteria for multiyear resilience focused funding (criteria B) and therefore recommends that 30 MSEK be set aside for this project during , where 10 MSEK is allocated for Synergies with Long-term Development Aid The crisis has had a serious impact on development activities and many development projects have been suspended, changed to service delivery or postponed. To contribute to improved resilience of crisisaffected populations, coordination between humanitarian and development approaches is essential. To try to reduce aid dependency, humanitarian assistance should continue focusing on life-saving activities, but at the same time also strive at building more durable solutions from the start. With the urgent life-saving needs that exist in South Sudan at present this is a considerable challenge which requires that development actors and humanitarian actors work together. Sida s development funding to South Sudan has during 2017 amounted to 100 MSEK where the major part goes to the health sector and a smaller part to civil society and gender programmes. Given the escalation 9

10 of the crisis during the past few years, the possibilities to achieve sustainable development results have gradually been shrinking. As a result, the development support has increasingly been forced to move away from the ambitions of building sustainable health structures and come to focus more on service delivery and resilience-oriented activities. In that way, the gap between humanitarian- and development interventions has shrunk. There are also ongoing discussions within Sida around the possibilities for more flexibility and better alignment of development support to humanitarian assistance. A joint field trip between Sida s humanitarian and development staff was for example undertaken in October 2017, in order to look into these possibilities. As preparations start at the end of 2017 for a new long-term development strategy for South Sudan, it is important to find ways of better combining efforts and thereby improving the total results of Swedish assistance in the country. One example of combined efforts is a new pilot project in Northern Bahr el Ghazal which Sida began supporting in 2017 through UNICEF. In this project a number of UN-agencies and other stakeholders have combined efforts to provide assistance along the whole development-humanitarian spectra. The project is still in its initial phase but the effort is promising. Given the refugee situation in Uganda, the Swedish embassy is actively engaged in addressing the nexus between development- and humanitarian support: Today the Swedish-supported development interventions are increasingly including also the refugee populations in the country. The embassy is also actively engaged in the work that takes place within the CRRF, and has allocated separate development funding which will be used for resilience focused interventions directed towards refugees and host populations. A one-year position at the embassy has been created during 2017 to take on this particular task. SIDA S HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO THE SOUTH SUDAN CRISIS IN 2018 Sector/focus of work (incl. If Multi-year Proposed Recommended partner for Sida integrated or multi sectorial support indicate amount support programming) category A or C (MSEK) South Sudan Humanitarian Fund Multisector 48 ICRC Multisector 20 Action Contre la Faim (ACF) Nutrition, WASH 7 Church of Sweden (CoS) Education, child protection, CBPS 10 Islamic Relief (IR) Food, Health, Nutrition, WASH 6.5 Int. Rescue Committee (IRC) Health, SGBV 8 Norweg. Refugee Council (NRC) Multisector 14 OCHA Coordination 5 Swedish Mission Council (SMC) WASH, food security, livelihood 11 Swedish Red Cross (SRC) Emergency response multisector 4.9 UNICEF Multisector 14 Total REFUGEE RESPONSE IN ETHIOPIA, KENYA, SUDAN AND UGANDA IN 2018, MAINLY RELATED TO THE SOUTH SUDAN CRISIS Sector/focus of work (incl. If Multi-year support Proposed Recommended partner for integrated or multi sectorial indicate category A amount Sida support programming) or C (MSEK) (MSEK) CoS Kenya Education, child protection, FSL 5 CoS Sudan WASH, Shelter, Health, Nutrition Cat A (2019 : 2,3 MSEK) 3.4 NRC Uganda Multisector 8 SMC Uganda Multisector 9.6 UNHCR Multisector refugee response 28 Total 54 10

11 Recommended partner for Sida support CoS Uganda CoS Ethiopia ACF Uganda Sources ECHO: Humanitarian Implementation Plan (HIP) for Sudan and South Sudan 2018; FEWS NET South Sudan Food Security Outlook Oct 2017-May 2018; Key Message Update Nov-2017; IPC Update Sep March 2018; Humanitarian Response Plan for South Sudan 2018; Humanitarian Needs Overview South Sudan 2018; OCHA-CBPF grant management system; UNHCR: Information Sharing Portal South Sudan and Operational Updates during 2017; WFP Operational Updates and Dashboards during 2017; Information from meetings with donors and partners during visit to South Sudan and Uganda in Oct. 2017; Initial submissions 2018 of strategic partners to Sida; Notes from HCT-meetings in Juba during 201 Acronyms ADDITIONAL MULTI YEAR RESILIENCE FOCUSED FUNDING Sector/focus of work (incl. Multi-year support integrated or multi sectorial category B (MSEK) programming) Child Protec. GBV Livelihood, CBPS FSL, CBPS Multisector Cat. B ( MSEK, MSEK) Cat. B ( MSEK, MSEK) Cat. B ( MSEK, MSEK) Proposed amount 2018 (MSEK) Sub-total 22 GRAND TOTAL (2018) ACF Action Contre la Faim IRC International Rescue Committee ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency LWF Lutheran World Federation CBPS Community-Based Psycho Social Support NFI Non-Food Item CRRF Comprehensive Refugee Response NNGO National Non-Governmental Organization Framework CoS Church of Sweden NRC Norwegian Refugee Council DFID Department for International Development PoC Protection of Civilians ECHO European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture PMU Pingsmissionens utvecklingssamarbete Organization FSL Food Security and Livelihood RRRP Regional Refugee Response Plan HC Humanitarian Coordinator GBV Sexual and Gender Based Violence HCT Humanitarian Coordination Team SMC Swedish Mission Council HRP Humanitarian Response Plan SPLM/IO South Sudan Liberation Movement/In Opposition IAS International Aid Services SRC Swedish Red Cross ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross SSRC South Sudan Red Cross IDP Internally Displaced Person SSRRC South Sudan Relief and Recovery Commission IGAD Intergovernmental Authority of Development UNICEF United Nations Children s Fund INGO International Non-Governmental UNHCR United Nations Refugee Agency Organization IR Islamic Relief UNMISS United Nations Mission in South Sudan IRC International Rescue Committee USAID United States Agency for International Development INGO International Non-Governmental WASH Water and Sanitation Organization IR Islamic Relief WFP World Food Programme