General

The 2022 Papua New Guinea (PNG) General Election process has triggered unprecedented violence across many parts of the country, especially in the highland regions. The violence started in May and continued through August 2022, with July as the worse month from the spatial coverage and number of the affected population. While in most areas the violence is directly related to the election, in some places, it has resurfaced from long-standing issues, including land disputes, retribution, and unsettled disputes between clans, who are using the instability around elections to re-ignite fights. To address critical needs, a multisectoral humanitarian response is required in five districts. IOM's operational objective is to scale up and expand a holistic emergency response to the immediate and emerging needs of conflict-affected populations. Building directly on its existing field presence and portfolio, IOM is responding to the immediate humanitarian needs by providing emergency assistance using a multisectoral and people-centred approach focusing on shelter/non-food items, camp coordination and camp management, and food security, with protection mainstreamed.

General

Following the signing of tripartite agreements between the Government of Burundi, UNHCR as well as well as respectively the Governments of the United Republic of Tanzania and Rwanda, an estimated 142,000 Burundians are expected to return in 2021 (UNHCR). This number, comprising both voluntary returns and spontaneous returns, is also stressed by recently reported forced returns from the United Republic of Tanzania. The general objective of this project is to contribute to national efforts in strengthening the reintegration capacity for Burundian returnees and displaced populations within communities, through (i) improved access to land following awareness-raising of displaced/host communities on Housing, Land and Property (HLP), HLP related issues and capacity building of local authorities, and (ii) improved absorptive capacity of host communities for returnees through the provision of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) and shelter facilities, (iii) delivery of direct assistance and services to meet land access-related protection needs and risks experienced by returnees, including through mapping of services, referrals, and case management, and (iv) improved mental health of returnees’ through mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS), and implementation of social cohesion activities for individuals in return areas.

General

The main objective of the project is to support WASH needs for approximately 100,000 households in the coming months in a new site located in Ukhia Upazila – Kutupalong Makeshift Settlement Expansion Zone (KMS-EZ). The land will be a total of 2,000-5,000 acres and encompass current makeshift settlements (MS), Kutupalong and Balukhali reaching into the forest land as per requested by the Government of Bangladesh.

General

The project addresses the last phase of the implementation of the formalization public policy with the management and promotion of the processes for the granting of property titles. This initiative aims to formalize and promote land tenure rights in rural Columbia, with a particular focus on supporting and informing vulnerable populations. Within the framework of the execution of the project and as a transversal axis, a strategy of institutional strengthening and inclusion of the community in solving the problem is proposed through two lines of work: the application of routes to consolidate the legal security of rural lands for the rural population; 2. accompany the territorial entities so that they strengthen their human capital and can have an efficient administrative, technical and financial management in the process management.

General

Low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) require solutions that adapt livestock systems to climate change while improving nutritional security, reducing poverty, increasing social equity and socio-political security, without accelerating greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe) or degrading land, water, and biodiversity. Rangeland systems, home to 46% of ruminant production systems, face additional challenges to their long-term climate resilience, including land fragmentation and degradation, and long-term neglect (Herrero et al., 2016i; Ayal et al., 2018ii; FAO, 2018iii; Cervigni and Morris, 2016iv). Strategic, well-targeted action research can provide answers to the tough choices and tradeoffs as well as ‘investable’ solutions that attract policy attention and climate finance.

Facing a climate emergency, research must provide proven adaptive measures that safeguard and capitalize on livestock benefitsv. Livestock are essential to the income and livelihoods of almost 930 million poor Africans and South Asiansvi, especially in drylands, where livestock production is the most ecologically rational farming choicevii. Consuming animal-source foods (ASF) has positive impacts on our cognitive developmentviii and growthix, and animals are a critical safety net and source of income for women.

Livestock production is highly vulnerable to rising temperatures, erratic precipitation and increasing extreme eventsx. About US$311 billion in livestock production value (~40% of total) are exposed to various climate hazards, especially drought (88 billion US$), climate variability (84 billion US$) and heat stress (US$61 billion)xi. Dryland pastoral systems experience intensifying impacts from climate change and other forces (Herrero et al., 2016xii; Cervigni and Morris, 2016xiii). Climate is a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing risks and insecurities that may lead to further tensionsxiv and conflictsxv. This is important for livestock agrifood systems (LAFS), where conflicts on natural resources access, use and management (land, pasture and water) are a widespread concernxvi. Innovations such as improved and widely disseminated climate information services show promisexvii, but there is little experience using them in LAFS.

Research must also provide innovations that mitigate livestock climate impacts. Livestock cause ~15% of human-induced GHG emissionsxviii largely due to low feed efficienciesxix land use changexx, land degradationxxi and deforestationxxii. Land degradation in rangelands is a particular concern; while restoration offers opportunities for carbon sequestration, rangelands receive little attention compared with forests (CDKN, 2021xxiii; IISD, 2016xxiv; Andrieu et al., 2017xxv ; Haddad et al., 2021xxvi; Cervigni and Morris, 2016xxvii). Nearly 50% of LMICs prioritize livestock-actions in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – national blueprints for climate actionxxviii, and some are developing livestock-based Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actionsxxix (NAMAs), but implementation lags. Governments need technical support to access finance, implement programs and report mitigation achievementsxxx. These challenges apply equally to the private sector where large-scale production changes landscapes, and supply and demand shifts can provide major benefits and influence consumer behavior, yet evidence for the livestock sector is scarce, meaning that investment in resilient, low emissions (RLE) practices by private actors along livestock value chains is lowxxxi.