 Thank you. Just to say first of all before being in Geneva I spent 20 years in the field as a practitioner where we have the MPI presentation, I worked in all those countries for extended period. So it's really nice to hear. In fact it's music to my ears to hear all these presentations but it's slightly intimidating to be surrounded by all this scholarship and academia. But I think it's really what we need as a community working in these places learn doing these places must up the context are must of the data is humanitarian in nature. Majority of it but that seems to be changing. Slowly most of the programs a humanitarian to but one displacement.它 takes place is a physical obvious human rights impact on affective populations that is an awful lot happening under the surface being中國 without again the presentations from Columbia. On Columbia Boundy. Yn od حenchen reconciliation. There mae'r sylwf yn ymweld sylwf sydd yn ymweld yw'r eu cyffredineth. A rydych chi'n ddweud y gael o unig gennych, oedd ymwyntio'r gael o'r ysgolol yn enwyd cydwylliant, o'r ddefnyddio'r gweld ymwyntio, gweld yn fwy o'r gendro, ac sy'n dweud o symlion. Rwy'n gwybod yr unig i chi'n byw, mae'n gwybod i rydych chi'n ddwy'r gweithio, rwy'n gweithio'n ddwy'r gweithio i gael o'r ddwylliant i ddwylliant. Rydyn ni'n gwybod i gael eu cyfnodd gyda'r panel ar y dyfodol Llywodraeth, ydych chi'n gwybod i'r gwerthoedd. Rydyn ni'n gwybod i gyd yn ddech chi ar hyn o gweld yn cyfrifio'r gwrthwyr ar y Gweithgoriaeth ym Mhwyllgor, ydw i wneud. Rydyn ni'n gwybod i'ch i'n ddim yn y ddweud o ddefnyddio'r gwybod. Mae'n ddweud o'r ddweud o gwybod i'ch gwybod i'ch gwybod, ond rydyn ni'n gweld i'ch gwybod i'ch gwybod, ac mae gennym ni'n gweld y syniad ar gyfer y gweld ar gyfer y gweld. Felly, y panel rhai yw yn bwysig yn deisembarol, ar y ffrind y year 2021 ac rwy'n hynny, rwy'n meddwl i'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Mae hyn yn y 29 o'r peth o'r plan, ond rwy'n mynd i'n ddim o'n ddod i'r ffyrdd o'n ffrind, rydyn ni'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Mynd i ddweud yw mae'r ysgolwyddiadau yn ymweld â'r ysgolwyddiadau yn ôl sy'n gweithio i ymddangos cyfnodol. Yn ystod, sefriwn am y ddweud â'r ysgolwyddiadau, mae'r ddweud yw – fwy oedd ymddangos hynny – a ymddo i'r ysgolwyddiadau yn y sefriwyddiadau ar gyfer y gandwch yn ei ddweud â'r ysgolwyddiadau. I want to just say a few words about it because I think it's really important and it has its roots in the community development practitioners in the 60s Professor Chambers and all that group around him and it gained popularity under a World Bank project in the 80s then sort of died off and now it's come back but what it didn't do is it was never used to address humanitarian crises not to the extent required and now the Secretary General's Action Agenda says community based planning is what you need to do. I'm telling you all this because it's directly linked to the data that was presented that the community based planning using these tools from the community development era and community of practice it unpacks those nuances those gender disaggregated differentiated dynamics in displacement settings which is essential and a prerequisite for driving pathways towards long term recovery so I'm really pleased to see it as a sort of UN priority sorry to speak from the UN side of things. And I hope that is one way to take academic research analysis which is a critical baseline and put it into practice going forwards and we heard in the fireside chats before and in the first session you know that people solve their problems because they choose to solve them so the first step for us is to find out. I'm speaking without notes so it's a bit difficult to keep my thread. The first thing for us is to find out what that baseline is but then put the people in a position where they're able to define and drive their own solutions and as such the assessment process of community based planning the process becomes the product actually coming together as a peace building process in and of itself. So I want to say all this because I think the presentations were really interesting and I think for people like myself it's really important to make that link between what the granular and nuanced understanding that's coming out of the academia literature and link it with programs going forwards. And not those that are led by NGOs in the UN but those that are led by local government authorities in the communities most impacted by displacement themselves. So that's what I could think of listening to the speakers without preparing my PowerPoint yesterday. Well thank you very much. I think those were excellent comments. You came in under time so there's a lot to be said for speaking without notes or PowerPoints. Thank you very much. So let's have a round of applause for those. OK so we have 20 minutes also left now so we're open to questions from the floor or I think people are gathering questions online as well. So you the lady in the second one. Thank you. You have a microphone close to you so you get to go first. Thank you very much. My name is Grace Bacillio from CGR Focus Climate Security. Thank you very much for this fantastic presentation. So there's a lot of work that has been done there in understanding really the impact of movement of people of mobility on certain demographic reps and certain context which is fantastic. But I would like to pick your brain on another aspect which is aspect which is essentially the reasons why people move in the first place. And I'm talking about mobility that affords displacement because of the negative positive kind of perspective of it all. Not all people move because they are displaced but there is a voluntary migration that we should really consider it's quite important. So in understanding the reasons for which the people migrate we've looked a lot at the IOM data did the flow monitoring survey etc. Most of the times what we see is that OK there's been a conflict or for economic reasons these are the two. Although there's a climate disaster but that's this likely less less common in a way. And in fact it's very difficult to understand talking to people and migrant whether the real reasons that they're moving that are pushing them to move. So what do you suggest we should do in order to really understand the real drivers of mobility. And how do you see this changing across different contexts and different demographic reps. Thanks. Thank you very much. Let's take a couple now. We've got. Let's go over to the side side. Thank you very much. I'm Eva Maria Ega from Univider. So I have also a bit the question of what else can you tell us based on this very rich data and all your experience in the field. So for example for Isabel and what do we know about the experience that the displaced had when they were either internally. Displaced or brought. So what what of that experience is maybe driving the outcomes that you observe. And Sophie do you know more about that about also the existence of these camps in terms of the differences that you find. Are they driven by the challenging situation in the camps or is it something that these people bring with them because they had to leave everything behind. And these kind of background stories. And then I have many more questions and comments but I want to let others as well come to me. Thank you. And we've got one more next to you. Let's do three and then. Thank you. My name is Andres Villamizar in Colombia. I would like to ask Anna Maria if there is any research being conducted in the differences in the likelihood of a Venezuelan immigrant to be engaged in criminal activities with PEP. And without PEP. And now I believe all Venezuelans are eligible for PEP so it's going to become harder to do this research. But I was wondering if you have any any insights in that topic. Thank you. OK. Thank you very much. So let's stop there and get some answers from our panellists. Is it possible to have a virtual panellist. Is it possible to have her on screen as well or not. Is it possible to have Eliana on the screen. The who was the virtual who presented her work virtually. Yes. Here we are. OK. I said that the first question was a general question I think to everybody which was about understanding the causes of forced displacement. So perhaps we could do a quick. Does anybody want to start with that. I think there are two questions. The two questions is one about I think measurement and questionnaires and what sort of questions we should have as researchers. I mean that's an excellent question. Right. And then a lot of the analysis that we do is on the basis of people having been displaced already. And in the context of forced migration we take we take the fact that they've moved being conflict. But you're right that there is many decisions and timings. And a lot of the analysis that we do for example in Burundi. There's always the question on when you leave. Why you leave first. Who leaves first. And I think those nuances should be part of the way we should be thinking in this entangling these reasons or these drivers of moving and in the context of displacement. Any other insights. Yes. We will have a panel today to close the day about the Households in Conflict Network. And I'm going to discuss a little bit all of that. But what I do believe that it's very besides knowing what drives migration and I agree completely with you that is a decision and that's an important decision. Is that it's very difficult to separate many times economic conditions from conflict dynamics. Because sometimes the economic conditions are the result of conflict and sometimes people are really migrating because they were victims were the victims of conflict. But what I think is very important in this discussion is that migration is a very important strategy and an alternative for people to survive amid conflict. For them to move it's very important. Equally so done for economic migration where you migrate to seek better opportunities here. You're trying to seek protection and refuse from violence and conflict. So allowing people to migrate either internally or internationally is very important because you are providing people an opportunity to survive sometimes. Thank you Sam. Did you want to come in? Yeah just to say I think the drivers of drivers of displacement often obscures from view those complex array of decisions people make to displace themselves as a preventive measure for shocks and stressors. So the number of people who are actually forced to flee their homes in the night terrible as it is is much smaller than the number that make that conscious decision. And I think whereas before displacement was often measured using humanitarian metrics we're getting much better at looking at the social economic environmental and conflict dynamics that surround this displacement. But also there's the enabling factors as well. So people who displace and move further afield it's not just about the push and pull factors but now these networks for migration are so set up across the Sahel for example. That's a massive consideration as is digital communication which is enabling those communication networks to set up people moving routes. I'm sure it's the same in the Northern Triangle. So I think we're getting better at finding out the data that we need to gather and also combine and analyze in a more comprehensive way. I would make one short additional comment to say that as well as the reasons why people have been displaced, one particularly important area of study that I think is often underrepresented in questionnaires is asking more questions about what the actual process of displacement was like for people, the ways in which they left and how long it took them to flee or leave because I think these are the sorts of things that we're having more and more research around trauma and the psychosocial effects that people have when they're in their new countries. That understanding what the actual process of displacement was like for individuals and what that relationship is to the ways in which they're engaging in the society in which they've resettled is also really important data to collect. Eliana, do you have anything to add on this? Thank you, Lucia. No, I just want to mention that it's a very important point, at least for the analysis of gender specific in the case of Somalia. Many people were displaced not only because of natural disasters but also because of conflict. So taking that into consideration in the analysis should also be something that we should be thinking of data permitting, right? Because it's not necessarily the same for a person to be displaced because of disasters versus conflict or combined, which is the case for a vast majority of displaced in Somalia, that they have been displaced multiple times because of both things. So something for us researchers to think of in the future and obviously, as mentioned in the panel, taking that into consideration when collecting the data is also very important for future policy making. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. So let's turn now to the specific question, I think, which was to Sophie on multidimensional on some of her findings. Oh, sorry, Isabel, did you have something to add? No. And you had a specific question to you as well. Yeah, there was a question about the experiences and this is a great question. We tried to go at it in the paper because obviously these differences in experiences that may explain this attitude in all, differences and sentiments. And one of the, so the findings being driven by internal refugees in a way we tried to understand sort of what's behind these. And if you think about international refugees then coming back, they were in another place, but they also got a lot of assistance and there were international communities helping while they were away and while they were coming back, which was not necessarily a case for internal refugees or stays for that matter. So we do not necessarily explain whether these, how, whether and how are these differences directly explaining all results, but this is a, I think this is sort of the key in here to keep understanding and to take into consideration in the design of policies, especially when sort of the return of lots of displaced people needs to take this into consideration. Thanks. Yes, and also I think just the kind of what else results. I mean, really I think the key part of our study and looking at the MPI at the household, at the individual and at the interhousehold level was really showing us the differences in poverty between households. Between hosts, between displaced peoples was being driven by displacement status, but actually at the interhousehold level for boys and girls in the same household, men and women in the same household, it was gender that was driving that difference rather than displacement. And then the question really about camps, I think, yeah, so I think what we, like in the example of Ethiopia, while there were high levels of deprivations in the education indicators, so in people who had completed primary schooling in children who were currently or not currently attending school, that while those were high among both hosts and the internally displaced populations, again, it was the gender differences were only significant amongst the refugee population. So, yeah, we did see that with camps despite the fact that in Ethiopia there is a lot of foreign aid that goes into schooling for particular, for camps. So, again, that difference between gender and displacement status and the different types of drivers that are made possible by the granular data, I think, is really interesting. And Eliana, does there anything to add? I think our findings are to some extent similar to what the panellys was just saying that many of the difference that we find are mainly gender differences only among the displaced. More so than on displaced, so this is probably related to specific gender related disadvantages that people are facing in Somalia when displaced, right, even though those that are outside camps or even in these informal sermons also tend to face specific circumstances that put them below the poverty line. I mean, poverty is very high in Somalia overall, but we do see that the gender difference tend to be or disadvantages tend to be more marked among the displaced. Thanks. And so let's turn that to Anna Maria, the specific question. Yes, that's really a great question. And we did a study, I didn't show it today for the sake of time, but we tried to understand whether crime changes because of PIP and what we find, but we only have information on crime reports. We don't have information on crime participation, which we would love to get a hold of, but we haven't been able to get access to the data. But what we find very interestingly for gender issues is that there is an increase in crime reports for sexual violence and domestic violence from the Venezuelan migrants, from the women, who I believe feel that they are more integrated into society and they are less fearful to report crimes to the authorities and they are not feeling that they might be deported if they do it, so they report more sexual violence and domestic violence. As victims. Yes. And the effect is quite strong. But we want to know also about crime participation, but we don't have the information. We only have reports. Okay, thank you. So I think we have a few minutes left, so time for another round of questions. I know there were some people I didn't get to, so we've got one. Can I ask you to keep your questions really short so that everybody gets to ask them? Let's start in the frontier and then go back to the set. Perhaps you could start first. Just have a brief question about the representativeness of the data. For instance, Isabel, when you go to these communities and you survey 15 households in each community, these because they are the same size. All the time worry, I like very much Anna Maria's work that I know because I understand the type of survey that was on. I'd like you to comment on the specific question for you, but more generally on the use of official household surveys to understand migrant and refugees since they are not representative for them. Thank you very much. My name is Jesse Wood. I'm from the World Food Program and thank you for these very interesting presentations. First, a comment and as a practitioner, I think it's very, very useful to see research like this come forward that gives us greater insight on the lived realities of displaced populations. In particular, there's a preconception amongst many that refugees may be in a better situation than host communities given the humanitarian assistance, etc. That goes to them and I think your work is showing that that may not be the case and we need to take that into consideration. The other point I wanted to raise was I think it was a very good exploration of the impact or the outcomes associated with identity vis-a-vis gender. But I didn't see and I haven't heard talk of other elements of marginalization, whether that's ethnic identity, social, caste level or others. And that's a really big focus of our work right now is we're seeking to put the centrality of protection more forefront in our engagement with affected populations. Thank you. Thank you. There's somebody behind you as well. Thank you. Jean-Prosom Estat from UC Louvain. I have a question to Anna-Marie. What's the importance of this two years limit? So what happened for refugees when you are at the end and do you think that some of your, it minimized the potential benefits of it because refugees would have less incentive to invest in human capital? And then for Sophie, but it's a very small clarification maybe we can talk afterwards. It went very fast, but I thought that one interesting contrast between what I would call the incidence of poverty and the death of poverty was for the incidence the gap was huge between refugees and non-refugees, but not so much for the death. So it suggests do you think that aid may be an explanation for the fact that refugees will not go so deep compared to some locals for example and maybe it may create some kind of tension? Okay. Thank you very much. We have another two more questions I think on this side. Thank you so much. I have like three questions. I want to join for my speakers on the reason of migration as well as the issue. So I wanted to know in your sample, did you include those who migrate because of climate shocks because forced displacement can also be due to climate shocks? And by the way, did you find any difference between urban and rural internally displaced persons? Especially for, let's say climate shocks are more important sometime in urban areas compared to rural ones. So did you find that some groups are more vulnerable to this compared to others? And finally I want to know, did you for the refugees study, did you find any difference between Cambays refugees and urban refugees? Thank you very much. Behind you for the last question. Thank you so much. My name is Graham Blair. I'm from UCLA. First question for Sophie. I was really struck by the finding from North East Nigeria where I've done some work that there was a 70% of people were monetarily poor but not poor according to a multi-dimensional analysis. And so as you pointed out, these are measuring different things since I wonder whether you could just say something about what it means to be monetarily poor and not poor by the MPI definition there. Like is this, should I be thinking of this as people who are being provided basic services that are by external actors that mean they get across the threshold in your measure or is it something else? And then for Ana Maria, I was really interested in the issue of xenophobia and the intake up of the state programs. And so first I was curious if that was being directed at all beneficiaries because you could be identified from this card that you were Venezuelan. And if not, I've read a little bit about the differences in xenophobia directed at people who can be identified as Venezuelans easily by kind of descriptive characteristics and people who maybe live closer to the Colombian border and whether that kind of led to distributional differences in who benefited from it. Thank you. Okay, so I think perhaps what I'll do is just go through the panelists in the order that you spoke and you can pick up the questions that were either directly asked of you or your research or you can pick up the general questions there. Let's start with Isabel. Sure. Thank you for the question on representativeness of the survey. So this was a national representative survey we used census data to sort of pick all the households, all the sort of formal formalities are in the paper. But in particular we could have had households with no refugees or no migrants or no international migrants. So the idea was to be able to have sort of these comparisons. We had about, I think, so about 60% of the households, for example, were stays with about 20% international returnees and about 17% international returnees. Some households could have international returnees and international returnees and international returnees. And so the other question was in terms of the other elements of marginalization. So we, I mean, in the specific case of Burundi, we did not necessarily ask about ethnicity. So this was sort of out of the kind of questions we could ask, but we did have the proportion of different ethnicities at the community level. So in some of our previous work we do account for that. Yeah, thank you. So quickly on household surveys, I would say that, yeah, so most MPIs tend to use household surveys, so we are very familiar with them. One of the great parts of being part of the research program that the World Bank did in the last couple of years is that we were using World Bank surveys that had recently been produced to sample for forcibly displaced populations. So I completely agree that to properly evaluate people's conditions using those surveys, it needs to be representative for those population characteristics, so it just depends on the survey. But for our case it was representative and that's why we use them. Quickly on ethnicity, so actually another fabulous feature of the MPI I'd say is that we are able to do disaggregations when they are representative by ethnicity, by urban and rural area, by geographic administrative region. And for at least some of the countries that we use we did have ethnicity data, but I think for, I mean as you saw we have so much stuff to go through and we didn't end up doing that type of analysis on ethnicity, but I think it is important future research to absolutely do. On the incidence and intensity question, so actually quite interestingly it's a pretty common finding that there will be big differences in incidents when you're looking at different comparable groups, but intensity tends to be not as varied. Whether that's a feature of the measure itself or a feature of the conditions of the type of poverty that we study I guess is there's work that my colleagues have done to kind of look into that that I can, we could talk about later. On climate, so I guess the camp versus urban, so we did find actually like that and that's part of why I was highlighting the Ethiopia incident case studies as we went through the five is because the differences were definitely higher for the camp samples whereas the other three countries, it wasn't necessarily that they were urban populations but they were dispersed throughout the country. And so there were still differences by displacement status, but the poverty levels were higher for people living in camps so I think that does absolutely make a difference. And then lastly on the Nigeria question around income poverty, so you're right, I don't think I said because I was going quickly, the monetary poverty that we were using was the $1.90 a day line. And actually quite interestingly Nigeria is one of the countries where even in our global index, which we compute with the Human Development Report Office at the UN every year, Nigeria is one of the countries that often has the greatest mismatches with multi-dimensional poverty and monetary poverty. And I'm sure there's lots to say about that, but part of, yeah, I mean, the main gist of it is that income poverty, I think, and multi-dimensional poverty, sometimes you're seeing big overlap in the populations about the types of people that we're talking about. But in a few cases and actually in Nigeria in particular, the difference is often enormous. So they are measuring different but complementary things. Thank you. Eliana, over to you. Thank you, Lusha. And yes, so the survey that we use for Somalia, the high frequency survey, it's a representative of intermalay space populations. So we were able to do it as because of that. However, that's not the case in many national and household surveys even when the population that has been displaced tends to be large. In the case of ethnicity, in our case it was difficult because we were already dealing with relatively small groups for the household family type or family types. So going beyond that would be quite hard with the data and it might not be useful to do inference at that level. But I also agree that it's very important to take ethnicity into consideration in a study that we did also with Lusha, Uche, Cattor, and the Arango on the impacts of Boko Haram on gender-based violence in Nigeria. We do take into consideration ethnicity and it makes a difference in the likelihood of experiencing either intimate gender violence or controlling behaviors. And in terms of the question now of climate shocks, yes, so I think I mentioned that we do include people displaced by climate-related shocks and conflict. And I agree that it might be useful to conduct an analysis separately maybe in a future stage because I mean these might have different implications, not only from a gender perspective, but also in terms of the risk of experiencing poverty and responding to that. Thank you. Thank you, Aniana. Thank you very much. First of all, some ideas on the elements of marginalization on migration and ethnicity. We're doing a project with Marcella here about attitudes towards migrants and basically what we're doing is that we're doing an intervention to improve the attitudes towards migrants. And in the Dominican Republic we do a video with Venezuelan migrants that are more similar to the population in Dominican Republic and Haiti. And what we find is that people are much more responsive and much more positive to the video of the Venezuelan migrant than not the one from Haiti. So there are a lot of linkages and a lot of overlaps between migration but also with ethnicity and some other dimensions. About the two-year limit, that's very important, but we were not able to analyze that because if the two-year limit ended they could apply for another one. That was quite easy, but we were not able to do it because the government launched another one. It was much wider for 1.8 million Venezuelans and it was for a two-year, ten-year process. But we did in some surveys that we just ended, asked something about the incentives to invest, giving that the time span increased. But I'm not sure we are going to be able to do something very good with that. On climate migration, I think that's a very important question and it's very important in terms of survey design. How do we ask that? Because maybe they don't want to say to you that they migrated because of climate. They might say that they migrated because their income dropped or that their yields, their agricultural production was destroyed or something like that. But it was ultimately because of climate migration. And you find that, for example, in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, when they do that question to people from the northern triangle, from the dry corridor, that they migrated because of hunger, but it was because of the crop failure which was related to climate migration. And Graham's question about Venezuelan. Yes, we really need to look much more into that. Of course, they have this card and this card shows that they are Venezuelan. They don't have yet the Colombian ID because they are not Colombians. They have a status, a special status, but they cannot be. But there is really a lot of xenophobia because of that and it has increased over the years. At the beginning it was not. But we haven't studied that and perhaps you give us a good idea to show different results for Barranquilla where the migrants are very similar to the Venezuelans. They have the same language, very similar culture and Bogota. Focus groups, they really said that being in Bogota was extremely painful, that they had a lot of obstacles, whereas in Barranquilla it was much better. So we need to explore that and I think that's a very good question. Finally, Sam. That could be really quick because it's lunchtime for everyone. I know I won't make any friends if I do, but from the World Food Program's question, we all need a level of categorisation when we do assessments just to organise our questionnaires and assessments. We've also found, and I know WFP have as well, that enabling communities to self-identify with the socioeconomic groups that they identify themselves with can be much more powerful and empowering during peace building and resilience processes. So whereas the baseline is there, we've tried to incorporate those best practices. I could talk about that for hours, but I won't. And then on climatic shocks, of course, some people are much more vulnerable, the coastal areas of Mozambique, the Chabelle valleys of Somalia to rapid onset shocks. But I think the group that's of most concern to us, and we're certainly engaging with governments to try and respond to that, is the pastoralists across the Sahel region, from the Somali region of Ethiopia all the way to Senegal. And I think, looking forward, we're going to have to get much smarter about how we respond to their needs, their adaptation needs, as the climate changes so quickly. OK, thank you, Sam. And thank you, everybody, for staying with us into your lunch hour. Congratulations to all our panellists for fantastic papers and a really stimulating discussion. So please join me in a final round of applause.