 breakout groups. I will give you more information on those five breakout groups when we come to that segment. From 1610 to 1612 we will have a short musical break where you can stand up and you'll hear a little bit of music. From 1612 to 1632 we will have a plenary where Rachel will also moderate and we'll get feedback from each of the facilitators of the five groups four minutes each giving their key messages from those sessions. So that'll be a 40 minute group work and then we will have 15 minutes from 1632 to 1647 and that will be the question and answer session. So we would appreciate if you could put your questions in the chat box later and we will have that question and answer session where Rachel will take those questions from the chat box. And then, sorry about that, and then we will do an evaluation and then we will have closing remarks by Sophia Catepe Grundy who's the deputy coordinator with the GPC. So a few housekeeping rules before we move to our first speaker. Unless you are a speaker we'd appreciate if you could keep your microphone on mute due to connectivity and bandwidth issues. This would be well appreciated. Our speakers will be given five minutes for their presentations and there will be a 40 minute breakout session and this session will be recorded and available on the GPC website and there will be a Q&A session where the questions that we put on the chat box and the moderator will be taking those questions for the session. And without further ado I would like to introduce Bruno Donat who is the mine action area of responsibility coordinator and the head of the UNMAS office in Geneva. Bruno, over to you. Thank you very much Nancy. I hope you see and hear me. Yes, we do. Bruno, over to you. Thank you so much. So I've been asked to offer some opening remarks which I'm honored and glad to do. Why me? I'm not sure but I'm the global coordinator of the MAOR. A little bit about me. I've worked in humanitarian issues on development, on peace, just back from the Congo and I see another speakers from the Congo. And I've also recently looked into from the field perspective working on nexus issues and in my experience I also come with heading a stabilization unit in a conflict setting. So today we are very pleased to welcome you to this session which is collective protection outcomes through the nexus. This session has been, as Nancy mentioned, jointly organized by the GPC strategic advisory group, child protection, gender-based violence, housing, land and property and mine action of responsibility AORs. And we really want to try to bring together partners, service providers, academics and donors to hear from you. I can see that we've been joined by 40 plus of you already and we are very pleased about this. And of course we know that we are in that strange period of the COVID-19 pandemic that impacts protection concerns further in humanitarian crises and of course exposes vulnerable populations to new threats. And I think it's so timely now that we have this discussion to kind of deliver better on our commitment to I would say the main theme, the centrality of protection and to advocate alongside other crisis affected communities to ensure better protection outcomes. The way this session is organized is to hear views and I would imagine as I offer my opening remarks to see complementarity, to see how we can work better. Oftentimes I come from the field also, we want to pull the sheet towards us whether it is peace, humanitarian development and sometimes it has to do with the bottom line of budgets and monies. One key message I have for you as we open this discussions is to think about priorities and sequencing of events and organizational matters. Of course we can draw from what was discussed at the World Humanitarian Summit. We know we have the IASC like guidance definition of collective outcomes and most of at least my field colleagues are used to the IASC protection policy that calls for mobilizing other actors to contribute to collective protection outcomes. All I want to say is enjoy the conversations as I often say we have two ears, one mouth, so let's try to listen twice more than we do speak. With that I wish you a good conference. My apologies to the organizers. I may not stick to till the end but I will try to and have a very good session today. Thank you. Thank you Bruno for that extraordinarily warm welcome to all the participants. So crisis and progeny are the most depressing development challenge in this decade for action. About 2.3 billion people will be living in these contexts by 2030. They're already home to 95% of the world's food insecure, 76.5% of the world's extremely poor and 13.5 million refugees call these places home. We must do better in crisis situations if we are to leave no one behind. That's why in January 2019 the OECD development assistance committee which brings together all the traditional donors developed a recommendation on the nexus which was then signed immediately by all the donors and now has also been signed by UNDP, WFP, UNICEF, IOM and World Vision. Now we're going to hear from one of those donors, Kirsten Lindig Kalström who is the first secretary of the Swedish embassy in DRC based in Kinshasa. She's doing tremendous work down there leading the donor group on the nexus. So over to you Kirsten for a donor perspective on the nexus. Thank you. Thank you very much and thank you for having me. I'm very pleased to be here both as a representative of the DRC but also because before I dove head first into the nexus I was in fact an interagency coordinator with UNHCR doing a lot of the protection coordinator that many of the coordination that many of the participants today are doing. So I'm quite happy to be here and very honored to be asked to give a few welcoming or opening words. Just to start Rachel was telling us a little bit about the OECD DAC recommendation and I think we can proudly say as Sweden that we've taken this very seriously. We have created in fact out in some of the most complex countries like the DRC dedicated positions to try to make this work. Now what does that mean for us? What do we exactly try to do? What it means is that we try to work both internally on aligning our programs to the humanitarian development and peace nexus but also that we try to take on as much as we can a leading role as coordinators and a leading role in the policy discussion around what this actually means in practice because it is very clearly one thing to talk about the need of working together and clearly a whole other thing for the multiple partners that operate in these complex contexts to actually find the intersections. So I'm just going to share with you a little bit of the process that we've gone through here in the DRC. It's been since the middle of last year where we together with the OECD tried to launch a collective outcomes process and part of that of course included the massively complicated questions of protection issues in a country where conflict is recurrent, displacement is recurrent and we are also host to a large number of refugees from the neighboring countries in a country where in fact the situation for the local population is already in a dire state and we have just recently seen food insecurity numbers increase again since last year. So just to give you a little bit on what we've done on protection and the nexus in general I'm looking to the side to see my notes to make sure I don't forget anything important but on protection and the nexus in general we've talked a lot about the importance of durable solutions. Now how to define this of course if you are a hardcore protection person I remember when I was at UNHER we have very strict definitions of what actually is included in the concept of durable solutions. I think here we've tried to modernize a little bit this view and tried to move away from the fact that we're talking either resettlement or citizenship in the sense that you have a number of people with protection concerns that in fact are being integrated into the local communities in one way or the other even if we have a lot left to learn and to change with regard to accessibility to their rights but for example in the DRC in fact a lot of the same rights are also presented to the displaced populations and so we've tried to take it a step further modernize a little bit how we define it and look at interventions that establish an environment that is conducive to the integration or the growth of populations. This is not a straightforward exercise in a country that has no governance structures most of the population live in extreme poverty and many human rights violations take place on a regular basis and so it's become really a discussion on how to how to find a balance between what we as humanitarians refer to as protection and what our development human rights oriented or colleagues refer to as human rights and the type of institutions that are required to uphold those rights and so we've taken quite a bit of time to look to look at those questions and we've also tried really to bring the different actors closer together and to realize that we cannot not even in countries with weak governance in fact allow ourselves to create parallel systems that substitute the state but we have to rather share the information and the analysis on needs that we see with our development partner with our the development actor partners and trying to better understand how we can institutionalize the response to some of those needs. This is hugely complex in the sense that the nexus doesn't necessarily mean that you have multiple flows of funding it often happens it's all coming in one way or the other from the same pot of funding and therefore while it is distributed across different types of actors based on different types of principles when it moves from a humanitarian to a development to a peace actor doesn't necessarily mean that we get more of the funding and so while yes we need to approach each other and try to work together there is never a clear cut I now hand it to you and I go home we have to find a way for us all to be able to say okay we're going to work in parallel until we find a way that one or the other can can take on the the necessary actions and that the necessary funding is made available so we try to take all of those discussions integrate them into the national development plan and say yes protection needs yes we need to meet these needs from a humanitarian perspective but we also need to put them into the national development plan the local development plan we need to ensure that the institutions who are according to the state have the mandate to carry these rights and to ensure that they are met actually are given the capacity to do so so we worked quite closely with the Ministry of Planning for example to ensure that these concepts are also embedded within the national system that brings me to the the point on collective outcomes we do have a set of defined collective outcomes in the country I think if you ask the 100 participants that have been part of the workshop and the process that followed they're all going to give you very varying opinions on if this was functional or not I think the process is for us has been more important than the final outcome we already have existing plans the humanitarian community works under the HRP the development community works under the PNSD and the national development plan we have our peace actors who are hugely involved of course in the transition planning of Manusco and the phase out of the mission each and every part of the system has their own plans and to add a layer of collective outcomes was perceived by some as overly bureaucratic by others as an extremely valuable process so we have decided that the collective outcomes are important the process gave us a lot but that the most effective way to actually track these collective outcomes was to make sure that they are embedded into the plans that each side of the each pillar of the nexus actually follows already and just to give you some more concrete examples developing collective outcomes is a huge process of compromise not everyone is always going to be happy with the results um and I don't think anyone is asking everyone to be happy and I think that is one of the conclusions that we that we came to here is that we're not about creating one project one program that everybody's happy with as Sweden we are not in any way looking to fund a nexus project we are looking to make sure that there's a dialogue between our partners that allows us to report against a higher level result that we are accountable for and in the same way if we can embed the collective outcomes in the existing plans of the three pillars in the hrp in the national development plan and in the peacekeeping mission plans then they are accountable to report against those outcomes just like their humanitarian partners or colleagues or development colleagues without feeling that they have to make compromises on the work that they do so we can still do what we're good at doing we just need to find out how we build towards a common or collective goal and outcome if you want it is important when you talk about collective outcomes I had a long discussion with colleagues at UNHER and the protection cluster about this recently if you define collective outcomes to meet needs you are not going to succeed because the way a humanitarian meets a need is very different to the way a development partner meets a need and so and so what we have come to conclude is that I do see that we're over time I just have two more sentences to say what we've come to conclude is that if you talk about the root causes everybody can get on board if you talk about how to meet the needs then we're all going to have different approaches to do so and then collaboration becomes much harder and just to give one final concrete example of that when you talk for example and that's of humanitarian need in way of my examples are perhaps not so protection oriented but basically it's to look at the root cause of the need not so much the actual need in itself so that you address it long term I think that is in summary what we've learned from here and it's in summary what we are trying to pursue as a donor within the next donor group and thank you very much. Thanks Kirsten that was really interesting and I think the experiment in DRC or the experience in DRC is really interesting and important for everyone to have a look at there's been a lot of learning a lot of good learning along the way. Moving on now to the IASC the results group 4 under the IASC is about the nexus and it's critical in advancing the nexus thinking amongst humanitarian actors. To do that of course results group 4 has to reach out to others and the group has strong links in regular joint discussions and events with donor groups such as the international network on conflict and fragility and with other groups inside the UN system with a broad membership that is also not just humanitarian actors but also development and peace actors as well. This of course is the nexus in action at least at global level and now I'd like to hand you over to Marta who is the my co-chair of results group 4 she's the humanitarian director at Oxfam and she's going to talk to us about the IASC's new guidance on collective outcomes. Hi thank you Rachel for the for the presentation I will share my screen very very briefly and I will try to be very brief as can you see my screen yeah oh because yes go so I'm going to introduce to you the like guidance on collective outcomes that is a product of the results group number four that was endorsed by IASC in June. I'm wondering if it's my connection or if it's her. I don't know I can continue I don't know you can just know I cannot say anything about for that. Hi Marta Sofia here you're breaking can you try maybe to switch off the video for the time being and we see if it goes it's better thanks. Yeah I will try to but I can I'm okay I cannot see my screen in fact. No now we can hear you Marta go ahead we can hear you. Okay so this is coming back okay so as I'm showing my screen we developed in uh last year in June we developed the like guidance to collective outcomes that is a guidance that was uh that is the result of a long process of consultation um okay sorry it is very challenge okay now so is the is the result of a long process of consultation with different actors yeah uh and is uh is a document that is responding to a needs that has been expressed by field colleagues and HQs HQ colleagues and instead of developing a new guidance and a very top-down document with a recipe for the nexus and for the development of collective outcomes we thought that it was going to be much better to have a long consultation with colleagues and we ensure a consultation with more than 40 people country base and HQ base in order to discuss about what was expected for the guidance. I'm not going to go as I said at the beginning to detail so what you can find in the guidance I just want to open the interest from your side in uh in checking the guidance and the content but it is developing a way that I really enjoy the presentation about ERC because the guidance is giving uh choices around key questions about the wise words when who and how around different steps so when we work on collective outcomes when we are trying to design or what we are trying to implement or to mainstream the document is giving choices and pointers on things that need to be considered to ensure that we move into the nexus. It is developing a way as well that will help uh developing the knowledge dimension and will help into the development of the capacities of the staff. We know that working with an nexus approach is a big change in terms of culture and that means that we need to change attitudes and this is why the guidance is not a recipe but it's a flexible way in order to get adapted and it's a live document so we launched it uh in June we are just in the face of implementing and we hope to learn and to be able to share some experiences. As I said it is directed the audience of the document is mainly UN uh ERCs, HCs and ERCOs but as well other UN and NGOs, agency heads, field practitioners, donors on the field and program on project managers. There are some points that are quite important for these collective outcomes like guidance that is the fact that there are some prerequisites in order to work on the nexus and to define collective outcomes. It's the fact that we need to have the right people sitting at the table so doing collective outcomes only having development or only having peace or only having human Italians is not going to work. We need to ensure that everything is built considering what is the knowledge and what are the capacity gaps but we are flexible in the way we are approaching the work and these flexibilities as well frame in the area of the funding and and donors are sitting around the table. Just to close uh this uh complicated presentation uh let me tell you a little bit and let me give you a grasp of what you can find in the document. So as I say at the beginning the document is framed around eight steps in relation to the collective outcomes and in in each step you will find pointers and choices in relation to key questions. So for example one of the questions that we hear from the case in DRC was about stakeholders and how important the process was. If you take a look into the step number two of the light guidance you will find key questions and pointers around convening stakeholders questions related to who should be convening uh who can should be invited how to ensure that the affected population is as well feeding into the process and so on and so forth and the same will be found in all the processes to finalize with the mainstreaming on how we can use the collective outcomes in order to feed different planning processes like the cooperation framework but as well HRP and others. Yeah so as I mentioned at the beginning we define that through eight steps yeah and in a flexible way through questions and you is there is not a need to use the guidance in a linear approach. Does it mean that if even in a country that has not gone through an initial first step can start looking at the guidance on the step number four when for the formulation of the collective outcomes or even for implementing collective outcomes even if the process to be defined has not been following the guide. We think that this is flexible and we think that the most important thing is on how we approach the work around the nexus. Yeah so these guidance can be found in the IAS web page is quite short it's 17 pages that was quite important we hear from the field they need to have very brief documents and adapted to the reality and please read it test it and you can share with us your feedback that will be more than welcome. I think that I will stop here and I really apologize for the problem with the computer. Many thanks Marta. No it was very good and thank you for the overview on the light guidance and collective outcomes and I'm sure we will share that PowerPoint with the participants online and now without further ado I'd like to also now bring it in Marta can you stop sharing the screen. I'm trying. So I'd like to introduce our next our next participants and speakers they will share with you the Somali example. So Kristen Arthur is a protection cluster coordinator from it based in Somalia and Teresa del ministro is a durable solutions coordinator with the UNRCO's office. So over to you Kristen. Okay thank you Nancy for that introduction and colleagues hello and hope you enjoy the presentation today. So as a protection cluster coordinator I've had the pleasure of working in both Ethiopia and Somalia closely with durable solutions working groups. So I wanted to just talk to you briefly about key areas of engagement that I have experienced as a cluster coordinator. So just a few bullets on the screen. So obviously active participation in the durable solutions working groups. It is a completely different structure that requires quite active participation in order to understand the differences between durable solutions and the cluster approach if you will. Both in Ethiopia and Somalia we I've experienced strong durable solutions coordinators which is obviously very helpful within the RCO's office and you know my perspective is that engaging with the durable solutions working groups is a good opportunity to communicate and establish relationships with other key stakeholders also development actors and donors that are funding these types of development initiatives similar to what the colleague mentioned from DRC. Usually the same donors potentially different focal points or the conversation is obviously different when you're discussing durable solutions initiatives. So also ensuring a protection lens to the durable solutions initiatives I think is the key role that the protection cluster and protection colleagues can bring and also highlighting the need for the expertise of the AORs particularly HLP but also child protection and GVV will play an important role in any of these initiatives that are moving forward in a country. So also the second bullet regarding like capacity building initiatives this was a best practice from Somalia that we were trying to to initiate and organize in Ethiopia organizing durable solutions capacity building sessions for cluster members because I think generally speaking as protection cluster members we don't have the same jargon the same understanding as was highlighted earlier by colleagues also different perspective on needs potentially root causes these types of differences of I think theories or practice are important to highlight in order for us as protection actors to come to the table within durable solutions initiatives. So also examples of collaboration on guidance documents and strategies of course holding joint missions assessments analysis also working together on relocation and return initiatives this is both the case in Somalia and Ethiopia my colleague Teresa will talk about an initiative in Somalia next even co-turing task forces together as durable solution and protection that's an example from Somalia ratification domestication of the Kampala Convention these are this is an example from both countries as well they've both ratified the Kampala Convention and in the process of domesticating this is just another example of how I've worked closely with the durable solutions initiative given that domestication of IDP law or policy is obviously core to protection as well as durable solutions and then inclusion of durable solutions in the objective of a HCT protection strategy that's also something to consider as well as including durable solutions in the protection cluster strategy so I'd like to hand it over to my colleague Teresa to take you through the next slides over to you Teresa can you hear me yes perfect all right sorry thank you very much so thank you Kristen for this comprehensive view of our collaboration the examples that we've brought to you today zero in on a particular aspect of our collaboration that we feel has exemplifies very well how considerations on collective outcomes as well as mainstreaming protection into those outcomes comes to light really in a when we have the opportunity to carry out relocation programs so we have two examples today from by Doha in an area called Barwako and Mogadishu Somalia and and this initiative when successfully completed are meant to be a direct contribution to collective outcomes that were established by the UN and international community in 2017 primarily within the remit of the humanitarian response but they are now being revised to become part and parcel of the UN sustainable development and cooperation framework these relocations have involved also a variety of partners really across the humanitarian peace and development nexus and another key tenets of the new way of working is bringing in the comparative advantage of this various stakeholders to ensure that an approach that is holistic is taken to the issue at end and in our case is really a successful reintegration of displacement affected communities the final aspect of course is the multi-year nature of these processes and relocations we felt were a good example because in some cases particularly for by Doha those have become part of long-term urban development plans city extension plan that the municipality has approved so next slide please so here you can see by Doha and by Doha on the on the left slide has experienced mass displacement following the drought of 2016-17 the size of the town almost tripled during that time and you can see the distribution of settlements on the left hand side of the slide on the right hand side of this slide you can see the new site Barwako is a city extension at the north and outskirt of the city and it's been big portion of land that was allocated by the government 20 square meter large is a sorry kilometers large and this site has been really looked at with a lot of interest by protection partners and durable solutions partners because of its proximity to areas that are not yet safe so the collaboration with protection the protection classes really brought about and created a compelling case for the partners that are working on the project to really take into account the security and safety dimension the Dunahan principle and a thorough risk assessment was rolled out it concluded that it was safe to relocate the households and now the first pilot has been concluded 1000 households have been relocated and the target is 4000 households all these households were at risk of forced eviction so that is also not a protection element and in the collaboration with partners we have acted together under the leadership of the government to bring in also urban resilience urban development partners that are working on roads to connect the new site and transform it into a city extension there is a plan in place as well to match development funding with a new joint program coming in called Samayanta that means impact and Samayanta is aimed at generating a sustainable financing for service delivery next slide please so this is these are the details I've just talked about and we can go to next slide great so here is the second example is a process at the early stages of the collaboration and so we are looking out a site in Mogadishu city that hosts approximately 5000 individuals protracted displaced the government due to protection concerns related to security has requested help from the partners to relocate the households into another site and here the collaboration with protection class has been fundamental to capacitate the government in carrying out profiling and assessments and on the durable solution side we have brought together the main actors and partners in Mogadishu try to see how this process can be better supported so this is another example of a government led process that entails a substantive number of individuals and where the protection element is key at several stages of the process to guarantee that first off the government abides by principles of due process and when it comes to relocation and secondly that old security and doing harm considerations are taken into account next and over to Christine okay thank you Teresa um next slide kindly so just just some key protection considerations Teresa really covered a lot of where the protection cluster protection colleagues were critical in the durable solutions initiative that example of relocations but of course we want to look at voluntariness um of the of the return relocation or local integration also organization of the return or relocation making sure that family unity is maintained that's an area that that I think is a strong point for advocacy within protection also of course safety and dignity without discrimination I believe Teresa talked about that as well as how we can contribute with the conflict or protection or HLP assessment I see that this is also critical in our role within a durable solutions initiative to contribute in those assessments particularly conflict and housing land and property next slide please so of course also advocating for a participatory approach decision should be voluntary self-determined obviously there's also there's always different concepts around consent if it's at a community level or an individual level so that's something that protection will will look after or an advocate go and see visits of course providing logistical support ensuring that persons with specific needs are included in those visits and then protection by presence and monitoring that can be also post relocation ensuring that protection actors are there to monitor the situation also with the host community and and the availability of resources because conflict can of course happen later on after the relocation or return so that's it from my side obviously there's more protection considerations but those were the key ones that came out of the example highlighted by my colleague Teresa so thank you so much over to you thank you so much Teresa and Kristen for that great example from Somalia on how the protection cluster is working closely with development actors so now because we're a bit late we're going to have the breakout sessions and I would like to first describe so we're going to have five breakout groups so I need to remind everyone so there are five groups there'll be two facilitators one facilitator one note taker for each group I believe they know who they are they'll be two groups one group group three will be in French so those online if you could put number three if you would like to be in the French group put number three before your name so you go to the participants go to your name and put number three there and for those that would like it in Spanish speaking breakout group please put number five in front of your name I hope everyone knows how to do that and please Fernaz can you please put the the jam boards because we will be using the jam boards for this could you please put that in the chat okay so the note takers will use the jam boards they they they know how to use that during your session and we will go into these sessions for the next 30 minutes till four fifteen and then because of the a bit of a delay we won't have a break and we will go into plenary with Rachel so yes so now we will please go to your breakout groups those that won in French please put number three here in front of your name and those that would like Spanish put number five in front of your name thank you be back I think they're still working on it a bit Rachel they should be back and so everyone else just be patient if in the meantime you want to think up a few questions for the speakers in the beginning I'm going to hit them with a question so please put something in the chat if you'd like to ask a question thank you Rachel I think most people should be back over to you for the the reporting back thank you so much welcome back everybody I hope you've had some tremendously interesting conversations and able to get out some of those issues those pressing issues that you're seeing on the ground so now is the time to discover what you've been talking about and share with everyone else while we're hearing back from the reporters from each group if you have questions that you would like me to send to some of the speakers at the beginning of our of our discussion please put those down in the chat and I'm going to choose some to go to the speakers if you don't I have some evil backup ones so if you want to be nice put something in the chat while this is coming back and so let's hear back from the first group group one which was moderated by Angelica and notes by Jim who who's reporting back from that I think I can do a little bit of the reporting and Jim can assist me as well we had some very good discussions and then it was clear from everyone that it's still a lot of capacity development needed both on development side and for humanitarian clusters on how to work together the language around what are durable solutions it was also evident that not all cluster leads get a seat at the table when collective outcomes are decided upon in a country and you have to ensure that you actually have access to the process to be able to influence we had some good examples from Iraq where they have used the child protection minimum standards to work both with government and local authorities and other actors to roll out these and in that way also enhancing protection throughout the work in Iraq and Jim can also help me now because there's a lot of information they carry me in and they're luckily all on the board so we can continue looking at them yeah so there was there was some quite practical things just about language that was used and so yeah the Iraq example of the Arabic child protection minimum standard so that was you know quite a practical thing a few examples around yeah this need for capacity building around you know how to just engage know what the jargon is know what the structure is the thinking behind develop durable solutions from a protection side and vice versa there's some bigger challenges around the neutrality issue of you know our humanitarians nervous sometimes to be more involved with those that work in close closely with state institutions how do we maintain that neutral space is that an issue that we're we're facing and that kind of links into other scenarios where for example an example from Ethiopia that there might be a framing of some issues as humanitarian and emergency rather than longer term development issues and that might prevent them being put in the longer term planning processes so so there was a how do we actually get them to think differently around that um yeah so that would be lastly if I may from group one was also that um sorry Angelica sorry um but if you're not speaking can you please mute we hear all your background noise thank you so much please continue I was going to speak actually so I don't know if there was a background from someone else somehow because I mean okay sorry so I was saying there's some good examples that came out is when you work for example in the health sector you can in the sector ensure that protection is in harm and unfortunately when we talk about sexual abuse there is also a strong need and similar kind of support needed both for humanitarian sectors and development in the same context okay over and out I think for group one one final point just to share just was that there was some um it was a couple of people that when you actually have a real positive leadership to bring the different areas together so in example Afghanistan on you know workshop bringing together um sort of humanitarian development peace actors was really helpful a great way to get actors talking when they might otherwise not dig but but the challenge if the leadership change does that is that then maintained and a quickly just an example as well from Uganda of just when you're in a country that's dealing with humanitarian sort of prices from neighboring countries um just how to make sure you have that parallel development continues for the host communities as well as the humanitarian assistance for those who refugees have been displaced so making sure that there's a communication and good parallel working there is really important so thanks so much um group one and we're going to share all these gem boards I think at the end so everyone will get this input but it's interesting what you're saying about you know knowing what jargon and structures we often talk about the fact that we're not trilingual you know we don't speak the same language across the nexus and that's a big barrier so that's interesting to bring that up as well as leadership and things but good to see some some positive examples as well and really useful to share those can I call on group two now that was Dahlia and Julian hi it was it was me and Dot actually Dorothy was helping um out so I'll let her add but I I'm going to take the liberty of summarizing a little bit we had good examples from Ethiopia Somalia Chad but what was coming out is that we're often building protection in or our perspective is that we're building protection in and whether that's child protection hlp mine action um or GBV into ongoing processes that involve collective outcomes and so I mean some of the discussions about how so that was capacity whether capacity building or having discussions are advocating to make sure that protection actors were included in durable solutions processes or similar there were examples of having joint missions where actors would come together so I think the idea is to have more of that and less so more working together from the outset more again of course the point of jargon came up but we agreed that it was about having a common understanding so sometimes looking beyond what each of our our descriptions of things were from the different different systems and just thinking what are the what are we coming together to do and what is our common understanding of the outcome or the objectives that we have and that includes really linking the emergency response and the longer term response knowing that have we do have to work with governments and authorities and any um hesitation to do that is not uh shouldn't be an excuse not to do it should be we should really be thinking of sharing experiences and working together to to to make sure that we are able to do that as humanitarian and development and peace actors um so I think that's everything Dorothy was there anything else please I just think what was really striking was just how restrictive it is um I was not having this commonality across language um especially when we are trying to influence outcomes with with people outside of um of the humanitarian development nexus so with with governments and duty bearers I thought that was really came across really clearly yeah thank you so much a lot of similarity with the findings of group one which was really interesting to see as well um thanks for that yes this language thing is certainly coming up isn't it um as something maybe we need a trilingual dictionary or something that we can work on going forward so um let's have a think about how we can work on that to help enable our results on the ground I'm going to pass to group three now um uh just a reminder before I do stay on mute if you're not talking um we hear someone in the background could you mute yourself thank you um uh and I'm going to pass to group three a reminder that we need questions in the chat as well at the same time the group theme is Christelle and Maggie please do I have group three yes can you see me and hear me very well thank you go ahead brilliant so we had uh field colleagues from Somalia Central African Republic and Mali who contributed and we also had colleagues from the global level uh so in terms of the first question the colleague from Somalia said that the HCT's protection strategy really helped to identify collective outcomes for instance durable solutions for IDPs in Somalia and helped different actors to work together so so let's not forget this wonderful HCT protection strategy that we've been developing in across the world they can help us to identify collective outcomes um and also uh there were some specific topics where there was apparently in Somalia a good collaboration between the peace mission which has a human rights department and and also a department working on civil affairs and working closely with the humanitarian issues to resolve specific problems also collaboration related to justice or rule of law and inclusion so that's for the first question maybe moving on to the second question so for the second question we had um interesting I think feedback from our colleagues from Mali was saying the problem is that sometimes we don't even know what the others mandates are so this really undermines collaboration and this came also from Somalia and other colleagues saying we spend so much time doing HNO and HRP that we don't really have space to look at you know what are other networks doing and and we could spend a bit more time also engaging with the civil society and and and making sure that social services are available there was also this idea that the humanitarians tend to focus to fill the gaps and sometimes because there's no social services or no development actors instead of focusing the human interaction on lifesaving they do put a lot of protection services now in the HRPs. Concerning the nexus there was also a comment that humanity and sometimes we cannot even agree on what the nexus means and this problem we need to try to get to a better understanding of what that means if we're going to take it forward and and yeah people just work in their area without really collaborating and what we need to change is we need to change the way we plan the way we finance you know humanity and development and peace action the fact that it's so compartmentalized leads to competition instead of collaboration so that's another area we would like to to change and also make make the planning a little bit more flexible there was another comment is that the area-based approach is quite promising because it helps different for actors to focus on problems of solving in a very specific context and the example that the colleagues from Somalia presented at the beginning of the workshop were excellent examples. I hope I haven't forgotten anything I've also put some notes in the chat box and maybe I don't know if any colleagues want to add maybe later. Merci beaucoup à la groupe 3. Thanks for that group 3, interesting to come out with the language question again and the financing question that's interesting as well I think that we you know the IFC and also other groups so the OECD as well are working on a paper on financing for the Nexus that's coming out in a couple of months so I think that'll be really useful and help guide us out that guide our thinking and that but that's certainly a question that we need to be better at and and I've often wondered if we don't need to do a development for dummies kind of about how development works as well because it's a little bit different to the way that humanitarians operate in the architecture is different as well so maybe that's something we can think about going forward as well but super good and super excellent reflections thank you so much for that. I still don't have any questions in the chat box but in meantime let's move on to group 4 with Yasmin and Sam thank you. Thank you very much we I will I will give a summary and colleagues also who are with us in group 4 feel free to compliment afterwards we had very interesting discussion and examples about how to ensure protection is included in collective outcomes and I echo very much the findings of of group 2 and how we find that some lessons learned some good examples is really about how do we build protection in so for example engagement with the durable solutions task forces in Iraq and the ability to comment on the durable solution strategy in the country helped strengthen linkages between humanitarian and development actors we've also spoken about the ACT protection strategy in Iraq and how it's included an objective clear objective on durable solutions which facilitated these linkages an important point on willingness from the leadership to implement such strategies is crucial for reinforcing these linkages and making them real on the ground another example also is how we need to focus on root causes rather than humanitarian needs which which is a way to bring together everyone around the table to address to address the needs basically and work towards and achieve two protection outcomes a challenge here was also faced in terms of flexibility between the various frameworks it's very much needed echoing also what group 3 mentioned in terms of colleagues from from Syria also raised a very good point on the importance of working on protection indicators and maybe changing the language of protection indicators to appeal to other non-protection actors including development actors and peace peace actors as well we've had very interesting examples also from south Sudan echoing also what Iraq mentioned in terms of working with durable solutions group working groups in the country developing intelligence surveys on post-return conducting monitoring ensuring accountability to the affected population so these were all entry points and ways of working with peace actors in south Sudan involvement also in various advocacy papers and initiatives with peace actors was also a very good entry points on working together towards collective outcomes in the country we've mentioned random examples from operations during the discussion including on Ukraine and how they worked also on capacity building with development actors on on what protection is and what protection mainstreaming is and how do we what does actually a protection risk mean to to bridge the gap between both actors we've also spoken a bit about area-based approaches to identification of needs and how it's a way also to bring together the various actors around one table colleagues please feel free to compliment what I mentioned in Sam as well anyone want to compliment I thought that was a pretty good summary but maybe there's some extra thanks I mean you you've raised some excellent points I think in that in group four about this need to refocus particularly on the root causes of needs and maybe to phrase things in a way that that appeal or that everyone understands you know the nexus itself is about refocusing on ending need rather than meeting me so it's interesting and it's interesting to see how durable solutions which I guess was it was originally all about ending need for refugees right and so in fact a durable solutions probably has some very good learning for the nexus itself given that you were one of the early adopters I suppose of the nexus approach um let me just then move on to the last group director I think was a Spanish group and that was Marta and and I'm not sure who but Marta yeah Julián but it was only Spanish at the end because there was very very few Spanish speakers so we moved into English yeah can can you show the yeah that's it so we had a very interesting conversation we had a lot of examples on how we were moving in including protection in the in the collective outcomes and there were different cases because countries that were present were at different stages from cases like Venezuela where there is an emphasis on training partners and identifying different type of partners and what they are doing in relation to protection and how they can join forces for cases like Livia where they have had a nexus working group in the past and where UNDP has facilitated an engagement between Humanity and Development Actors so it is an engagement through some initial training or through a dialogue and a conversation there was an interesting example as welcoming from Niger where through a conversation on a dialogue with donors they identify very clearly the connections between the protection challenges and long-term interventions and the case shared was about how the work on youth employment can reduce further protection risks in in humanitarian crisis and it was a good case to build from we have as well the case of Ukraine and the fact that the protection work has been done not not only with humanitarians in the eight city but as well it has been extended to development actors and therefore the the protection the protection priority the objective in HRP and others is owned not only by humanitarian sector but as well by development and it is easier to move and integrate protection into collective outcomes so it's about how the protection portfolio is owned and again the example of Iraq but what I found very interesting is how the colleague from Iraq presented from sharing from the protection cluster sharing the protection monitoring and how the protection monitoring has contributed to the definition of a strategy and components in the durable solution task force so that was kind of bringing at the same time processes together to allow sharing of ideas we discuss further on the blockers and enablers can you go to the next yes perfect yeah and I mean I will I will identify those that are a little bit different from the other groups there was a point that was identified about political sensitivity and it's clearly the case in in in Venezuela where some political sensitivity in a context that is highly politicized can generate some challenges in relation to the protection portfolio yeah but as well there were some other challenges that were very interesting related to the fact that there is not a common forum for development actors and humanitarian actors to come share speak discuss the fact that planning processes follow different parts and different speeds and takes different time yeah and it was as well highlighted that in some countries the funding is mainly focusing on humanitarian needs that the case of South Sudan huge displacement a lot of needs and the main part of the funding is dedicated to humanitarian therefore there is not a lot of the space for development and then the collaboration is very reduced because of this fact there was a discussion about the donors how they can contribute and enable or how they can affect negatively the conversation and there was a point about donors sending a message about humanitarian and development actors coming together but at the same time having different funding work streams and asking whether a common funding stream will not help and the final is about what we have to change and do differently there was a question about the language I think that it was a very interesting self reflection about we need to speak about protection differently because not in all the cases when we speak about protection the rest of the actors understand what we are speaking about and you go to the next slide please um so there was the funding the common language and there was as well about the mutual understanding and and to be willing to find this common ground and then after there was a very specific suggestion about can we have a protection focal point in all the development forums as well in order to ensure that these understanding sharing of information and common ground is being in a in a constructive and an easiest way that was it thank you that's a great feedback did you have any more no no I was going to say because there were there were some colleagues that were going to speak at the end but then we got brought into the main room I don't know if somebody wants to complete or adapt what I have said it was a great group by the way does anyone want to add anything to that feedback no okay um no I mean there's some very interesting points that came up in that one um the one about the financing is interesting um I don't think as humanitarians you would want to have to be submitted to the quality controls um and thank the programming cycles and sign-offs and restrictions of development finance so um pushing for um pushing for a common funding stream would just make your funding slower I think so um there has to be a better way though and I think that's around developing financing strategies um and that's certainly something we will think about um we will think about later but it's a big question and it's an important question and we can't we must have enablers if you like in the financing and not um and not things that are blocking us right I've only got one question in the in the chat so who am I going to give it to the question is um in your experience how do development actors want protection actors to get involved in developing and implementing collective outcomes and I'm going to give that question to Tereza. Tereza are you here still with us? I am I am Rachel's thank you um very easy question I must say thank you Dalia so easy to respond to um I I mean I've worked with a developmental agency before uh joining the coordination and still the coordination is affiliated to UNDP and I do think that um from a development partner's perspective what I've noticed over time in the practice is that there is an unparalleled knowledge in among the entire partners but populations and social change needed uh to really uh be talking collectively about impact scale and social and political transformations in countries which is what the collective outcomes ultimately support and what the nexus is all about right um so from a development partner perspective I would have uh wanted to see uh protection partners collaborating at that level I do think that on the part of the development partners there's also not so much knowledge necessarily um of the processes and wealth of information that comes from environmental partners uh it's coming up uh but I do think that the planning issue is a real one because we are sort of stuck and while being stuck in the planning cycles that are still separate and now are being merged but uh now we are um we miss out on opportunity for engagement so it remains the engagement remains an island dock basis it rests on the willingness of people to make it work every based approaches that have found a nice way around things because they really force actors to come together and to figure out the solutions and and therefore they engage their own respective planning processes organizations and financing with the purpose of working in a specific target area however uh this is not an methodology that is necessarily uh systematized in our formulation of joint programs of planning and stuff like that so um I do think there's a welcome change I do think that the UN development cooperation framework has given an opportunity to humanitarian partners mission partners peace partners to really work uh together following the principles of the new way of working but we are yet to see how this is gonna turn out in practice and if this the way in which we're doing it now will actually contribute to that high level impacts social and social change that we hope to achieve over thank you very much Turi so that was an excellent answer to that as you said very difficult question all right if you haven't got any more questions I'm going to make some up um my first questions to Kirsten so Kirsten are you online Kirsten are you still with us no Kirsten had to leave Rachel oh shame okay so let me pick on Marta next then so Marta from what you've been learning um in the IASC results group four what do we need to do now to help unblock some of the challenges around the nexus and enable this change um this change a different way of working over to you Marta thank you Rachel so I think that uh that the first thing is to enable a conversation and then to demystify what do we mean by engaging by collaborating by by sharing I think that in general terms uh the nexus is considered as a potential area that can generate a lot of stress because it is going to be losing identities and losing know-how roles and functions I think that we need to demystify that and we need to start a conversation when when every actor and every sector is recognized from what is bringing to the table but not denying the factor the need of the other sector to come and and work at the same time in order to um to work on the root causes so I think that it is about demystifying it's about recognizing the roles of others it's about being flexible and and trying to understand that we can and we have to work together if we really want to bring solutions to the same uh to the problems that we have been facing for quite a long time so looks very easy answer it's very very challenging to do because it's about a change in in ways of working and it's about a change in power dynamics uh so this is where it becomes very very difficult recognizing who has the power in each one of the conversations and how we have to tackle this conversation in order to make it happen thanks master I think that's a really important um point especially around the power dynamics and you know we should never forget that as a humanitarian community then the knowledge and the data and the information that we have about vulnerable people um is critical for good development programming so you know we have that power in terms of being able to take that data to the table um or to name and shame them if they don't if they don't do it um Kristen are you also still here yes i'm still here oh you sound worried so my last question to you then is um if you had a magic wand what one thing would you change that would help um help uh protection be more integrated in an excess approach yeah that's a good question um I know we're running out of time here so so I do think it it it boils down to um a capacity building request um of protection coming from a protection cluster coordinator's perspective um I think there does need to be more concerted efforts in ensuring that we have the right skills tools knowledge um to come to the table um on durable solutions and working with development actors because currently it's not really in our um in our toolbox if you will in my perspective so that that would be my my my wish if I had a magic wand over thanks Kristen I think that's a critical issue and something I think we're going to need to work on going forward so maybe perhaps um we can work between the ISC and the global protection cluster to work on some of that capacity building I'm going to hand back to Nancy now thank you very much everyone thank you so much Rachel for that and all the colleagues online there was very rich discussions and I had joined all the breakout groups I'm going to just quickly ask Farnaz can you please put up in the chat box the evaluation um I would appreciate just two minutes um of your time before we go to uh the closing speech by Sophia Katib Grundy who's our deputy coordinator can we just I'll put a little music to it and if you could just kindly fill that out okay I heard that my music might not be appreciated by all but now let's go to now our closing remarks and speech um so I'd like to turn over to Sophia Katib Grundy she's our deputy coordinator for the global protection cluster over to you Sophia thanks Nancy thanks everyone and thank you Marta and Rachel um for helping us shaping up this session Kirsten for giving your perspective from from DRC and Christine and Teresa to share your experience in Somalia and to all of you for for really engaging actively in this breakout group it's been really really interesting so I don't want to keep you too long but a key takeaway from from us um I think the first one is the the common uh conclusion that we need these communities these different communities humanitarian peace and security and development communities to become closer to bridge the gap in terms of jargons in terms of frameworks or frameworks of reference that we are using terminologies and planning tools that we're using we need to bridge that gap and that can be done by dialoguing more closely by involving each other's in our respective planning processes and developing collective outcomes at country level can be a conduit for that to happen can facilitate that to happen and we can leverage this collaboration to have better collective outcome there's a number of conditions for that to happen in a way that is effective and and we had interesting feedback from uh Kirsten in the DRC so one of the first one is I think to ensure that these collective outcome built on existing uh planning processes national development plan a local development plan but also existing UN uh plans uh we talked about the HPC we talked about the former UNDA for UN sustainable cooperation frameworks so really to use these existing tools um to really inform the development of this collective outcome and of course for our community the protection community to really use the HCT protection strategies uh or the cluster protection strategies as a reference point to to to inform these collective outcomes I mean there's a lot of effort and time put into identifying and prioritizing protection priorities in a country in a specific operation and this can really help shape these these these collective outcomes another condition I think is to have a common analysis and a common analytical framework in fact to harmonize a little bit from the beginning the way we look at problems so this has to be coming from a conflict sensitivity perspective protection sensitive protection lens so if we have this common analytical framework we can then come to a common or an aligned type of planning we also talked about using or adapting the way we're talking to each other we know that development actors might not necessarily be sensitive to talking about the needs of the population but rather talking about root causes we know that the World Bank when they come to the table are more interested in poverty reduction or abating unemployment or building infrastructure and we need to develop us as the protection community a way to engage with them that is attractive that is understandable uh for them so I think that's an effort that we need to do making our protection analysis and narrative more understandable by by non-projection actors I think we also need to align our tools we talked about the planning tools we talked about our coordination structure which needs to speak to one another the UNCTs the HCTs and the mission the peace missions need to have commonalities somehow and we need to try to foster that that engagement this is happening on an ad hoc basis increasingly and we saw the good example of Somalia through these durable solutions platform where we have the protection clusters strongly engaged but also development partners so we've got increasingly good experiences at at field level and this needs to be fostered and finally we also need our development colleagues to make sure that protection actors harvest seats around the table when these collective outcomes are being developed in Somalia after talking to Teresa and Christine we realized that yes protection is taken into account but the protection cluster itself was not necessarily directly involved so I think more more efforts needs to be to be made here for an intentional participation of protection actors in in this discussion so I'm going to stop here but very good starting point for a discussion and I think it all came to the conclusion more needs to be done we need to to continue dialoguing and and and being more familiar with each other to ensure that we all contribute to collective outcomes that have an effective protection nature and dimensions so with that I want to conclude thanks a lot everyone for your participation and hope to be able to continue this discussion at field level and at global level back to you Nancy. Thank you Sophia thank you for the closing remarks and I'd like to thank again all of the co-leads Rachel, Dalia, Marta, Angelica and Christelle and of course the key colleagues at the technical Farnaz who works with us in GPC Opsel and Bianca as well as Melissa and Yvonne Bianca works with the CPA award so thanks everyone for joining us for this really interesting session and I hope we can continue working with our development and peace building actors and through the protection clusters and other actors at the field level have a nice rest of the day thank you bye. Thank you everyone bye thank you bye bye.