Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) and Humanitarian Basic Needs and Recovery Programming in Ukraine: Recommendations

Oct 4, 20226 min read

Introduction

The war in Ukraine, which escalated in February 2022, with the large-scale Russian Invasion, has remained volatile as the front lines continue to shift. The humanitarian response is now expanding into newly accessible areas in order to help the population wanting to start their rebuilding process, as well as reaching directly those who were unable to leave and had been living under occupation. As humanitarian actors begin emergency relief and recovery programs in newly liberated areas, (notably multi-purpose cash and cash for work (CFW) for shelter rehabilitation) the necessity to integrate their programs and plans with the activities of Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) organizations becomes more essential, particularly to ensure protection mainstreaming is included in program design.

On behalf of MarketImpact, Thomas Byrnes created this paper at the request of the Ukraine CWG to provide recommendations on how Humanitarian Actors might link Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) with Humanitarian Basic Needs and Recovery Programming in Ukraine. Based on a desk review and Thomas' own experiences working in humanitarian responses where the risk of Explosive Ordnance (EO) remains for civilians. This paper is not comprehensive and is aimed to raise awareness of these issues and promote collaboration and linkages between humanitarian actors.

Situation

According to the State Emergency Service of Ukraine (SESU), as of the 1st of September 2022, in de-occupied territory and newly accessible portions of Donetsk, Kharkiv, and Mykolaiv oblasts, so far roughly 69,000 hectares of land have been assessed, including towns and critical utility targets, and almost 180,000 pieces of explosive ordnance have been removed.1 The government's military demining has been supplemented by a comprehensive humanitarian mine action programme, with 12 active HMA implementing organizations surveying 18,115,584m2 and clearing 463,898m2.

As areas increasingly become accessible, the risk beneficiaries exposure to explosive ordnance increases. The Explosive Ordnance Risk Education (EORE) Advisory Group, an international group of experts from the GICHD, UN agencies, international organisations and NGOs, in the recently published Questions and Answers on EORE for Ukraine estimating that "10 to 30% of the explosive weapons used, dropped, fired or launched do not explode as intended and many other explosive ordnances are abandoned in various locations," This means that a large portion of mines and other unexploded ordnance (UXO) used during the conflict will remain a threat to civilians after the fighting is over, especially for children.2 Furthermore, even in de-occupied areas, combat activity continues, and cleared areas are vulnerable to re-contamination from unintended shelling and aerial targeting.

Recommendations on linking to connecting and integrating basic needs, rehabilitation, and mine action.

Lessons learned can be divided into three categories: ensuring HMA informed protection mainstreaming of cash programmes, key areas where humanitarian mine action teams can assist humanitarian actors carrying out emergency basic needs and recovery activities, and key areas where those actors can assist humanitarian mine action teams.

HMA informed protection mainstreaming of basic needs and recovery programs.

HMA-informed protection mainstreaming can be undertaken for basic needs and recovery programs in the following ways.

Inclusion of rapid contamination assessment into the market assessments to ensure that markets are not only functional but safely accessible.
Establishment of referral mechanisms for the EO victims and identified EO to HMA actors during different steps of cash interventions.
Inclusion of EO trend monitoring included in cash programme PDM exercises

Key areas where HMA teams can assist humanitarian actors carrying out emergency basic needs and recovery activities

HMA teams can support in the following areas

Integration of Explosive Ordnance Risk Education (EORE) risk and awareness trainings for field teams designing MPCA or In-kind emergency response and recovery CFW programs.
Integration of Explosive Ordnance Risk Education (EORE) risk and awareness trainings for beneficiaries receiving assistance from these programs or taking part in CFW
HMA teams can support recovery teams to identify suitable CFW activities contributing to HMA objectives.
When financial hurdles prevent EO victims from accessing medical and rehabilitation treatments, HMA might assist humanitarian teams in designing tailored or context-specific cash programmes for particular families, or enable their referral onto continuing basic needs cash programing.
HMA teams can support teams undertaking recovery activities to identify and support return programing in areas cleared or confirmed free of EOs.
HMA can support in the identification of areas where explosive ordnance contamination have a high impact on people’s socio-economic lives for inclusion in recovery programs.
HMA can support recovery program teams to design wage employment and business support programs to prevent accidental exclusion of victims of EOs and are sensitive to the particular needs of EOs victims in their program design.

Key areas where humanitarian teams carrying out emergency basic needs and recovery activities, can assist HMA teams.

Emergency basic needs and recovery teams can support HMA programs in the following areas;

Victim assistance: Emergency basic needs and recovery teams can support HMA to design programs tailored to victims of EO to become economically secure. (Not exclusive to EOs including other disabilities). Additionally, these teams can support HMA to design programs tailored to victims of EO to become more socially and economically integrated into their communities.
Prevention: Intentional explosive ordnance risk taking behavior is often motivated by livelihood pressures, with the need to access high risk fire wood a key concern for Ukraine. Emergency basic needs and recovery teams can support HMA teams to design joint programing in areas where there is a risk of negative coping mechanisms resulting in either the use of contaminated land, or in the purposeful collection of EO for resale of scrap metal.
This can be direct programing targeting at household level or market system strengthening (development) programs to support increased livelihood opportunities in the EO contaminated area.
Where large scale prevention/Risk Education is needed due to the inability to clear land in the short term, emergency basic needs and recovery teams can support can support HMA is designing program that empower the community to develop and deliver responsible risk education initiatives, potentially with a CFW component
Integrated approach to clearance: Recovery and HMA teams can work together to design programs that take an integrated approach to combine explosive ordnance clearance activities with support to the market systems, community-based organizations and access to employment to provide a holistic approach.

How to develop integrated HMA and Emergency basic needs and recovery programming?

The section that follows include advice for integrated programming inside the same organisation, since it is an area in which I have experience; nonetheless, the principles are applicable to broader humanitarian actors that do not necessarily have an internal HMA component. It should be noted, however, that establishing programmes together at this level, as well as sharing financial possibilities, does not happen readily among actors without some form of collaboration agreement.

For actors who do not already have a relationship with the HMA agency, I encourage them to consider how the recommendations for the three categories of good practises identified above can apply to current and future opportunities (i.e. assessment: joint assessment, sharing of findings / implementation: joint missions, consultations with technical actors at the programme and project design stage, coordination and planning of complementary activities, etc.).

In practise, teams must be linked throughout the assessment, programme design, and implementation stages of the programme cycle in order to deliver integrated or complementary programming for HMA basic requirements and Emergency basic needs and recovery.

At the assessment stage

Teams must create a joint needs assessment (questionnaire, analysis). This can be accomplished by including questions about the presence of explosive ordnancecontamination, impact, accident, and casualties in multi-sectoral rapid assessments, as well as questions about the socioeconomic needs of people living in contaminated areas in Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAP) surveys and explosive ordnance impact assessments. Deploying dual assessment teams may assist in keeping both components of the evaluation in mind. Sensitize and teach programme teams on how to detect, collect, and report socioeconomic vulnerability and/or danger associated with explosive ordnance presence.

At the programme design stage

Teams may actively seek to promote the exchange of funding possibilities information. Joint go/no go meetings, joint project/program workshop design, either in response to a request or preferable as part of a programme strategy; this involves developing a joint set of indicators and developing joint concept notes that may be used/adapted when a call for proposal is announced. Use any lessons acquired from past "silo-implemented" or combined programmes.

During implementation

Teams need to create a referral system; there is a need to educate teams on the criteria and referral procedures for both individuals/groups/areas to be referred from HMA to basic needs programs and also the referral of individuals/groups/areas/accidents to HMA programs.

Program teams need to collectively examine current requirements and identify areas where a pilot might be built utilizing existing resources from present programs. For example, explosive ordnanceurvivors should be included in CFW programs and CFW participants working in suspected/confirmed hazardous regions should get HMA training.

For collaborative programs, ensuring that teams are working together, cross-trained, and mutually responsible for outcomes (implementation and management teams). Hold frequent review sessions to promote cross-learning and the identification of success factors and roadblocks. Make beneficial outcomes apparent through developing case studies and human interest stories, as well as advocating for collaborative projects with funders and local stakeholders.

Conclusion

The major objective of this paper is to raise awareness about the issue at hand and to provide some recommendations for potential first steps. It is recommended that those involved in disaster response and recovery make an effort to proactively contact with those involved in HMA in the context in order to identify opportunities for cooperative programming. In addition, in collaboration with the Information Management Working Group and the Cash Working Group, mine action activities may be further integrated into assessments of humanitarian needs and market conditions.