Index

Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2

The politics of refuge ..................................................................................................... 2

The right to participate ................................................................................................... 5

Participatory Politics in Shelter Intervention ................................................................. 6

Participation as social empowerment............................................................................. 7

Top-down Aid ................................................................................................................ 9

Participation as a livelihood opportunity ..................................................................... 10

Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 13

Table of figures

Figure 1 - official UNHCR figures as of .................................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2 – High Density Refugee informality on rented private land ........................................................................ 3

Figure 3 - Type of Accommodation available to Refugees in Lebanon, (Statistic Lebanon LTD, 2013) .................. 3

Figure 4 - Additional rooms by community, Wadi Khaled, Lebanon, ....................................................................... 4

Figure 5 - Refugee Accommodation .......................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 6 - Refugee Accommodation Physical Condition in Lebanon (Statistic Lebanon LTD, 2013) ...................... 5

Figure 7 - Torched Syrian refugee tented settlement by host community, Baalbek, Lebanon, (Meuse, 2013) .......... 5

Figure 8 - Marginality to Coalition (Frediani, 2013) ................................................................................................. 6

Figure 9 - Refugee Community-made balcony, Saida, Lebanon ................................................................................ 7

Figure 10 - Internal Partition by refugees, Saida, Lebanon, (PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution, 2012).................... 8

Figure 11 - Furniture, Akkar, Lebanon, (PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution, 2012) .................................................. 8

Figure 12 - IKEA Refugee Shelter ............................................................................................................................. 9

Figure 13 – Refugee Community Subcontractor ...................................................................................................... 10

Figure 14 - Host-Community Contractor using Refugee Workforce ....................................................................... 10

Figure 15 - Contractor vs Community Work, (PU-AMI, 2009) ............................................................................... 11

Figure 16 - Ring beam implemented by Refugee Community, (PU-AMI, 2009) .................................................... 12

Figure 17 - Refugee Community Workers, (PU-AMI, 2009) .................................................................................. 12

List of Acronyms

CBO Community Based Organisation

DRC Danish Refugee Council

INGO International Non-Governmental Organisation

MOSA Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

PRS Palestinian Refugee from Syria

PU-AMI Premiere Urgence Aide Medicale Internationale

SOK Sealing-Off Kit

UN United Nations

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNRWA United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East

2

Introduction

It is argued that the assertion of neoliberal theory of development as being just

towards all parties involved is a deceptive term. Urban development can be

problematic as it involves conflict of interest between different groups, activities and

the central state (Rod Burgess et al, 1997). Africa underwent devastating civil strife as

a result of decolonisation and complete rearrangement of internal multi-ethnic

diversities. Syria split along religious fault lines that were aided to surface soon as the

Arab Spring provided grounds for the possibility of rebellion. Religious mix and

segmentary loyalties in Lebanon are becoming more unstable due to the polarisation

that Syrian refugees have heightened.

This paper examines the participation of both refugee and Lebanese communities in

the emergency shelter programme implemented in Lebanon by analysing and

engaging the notions of refugee/citizen, power, politics and community participation

in humanitarian response as a problematic but essential symbiosis. To understand the

context we need to uncover the relationship between various groups acting on the

ground, and tackle the potential barriers to reach all layers of the crisis-affected

communities.

The politics of refuge

The UN estimates that 45.2 million are forcibly displaced in the world today

(UNHCR, 2013). And “almost one in five residents in Lebanon is now a refugee”

(UN, 2013, p. 3). UNHCR estimates that Lebanon, a country of 4 million has now

around 880,000 Syrian refugees, a number that Lebanese government put up to 1.5

million; this is added to an already existing 280,000 Palestinian refugees who arrived

following the 1948 Palestinian exodus. Moreover, UN (2013) estimates numbers will

rise to 1.5 million Syrians and 100,000 Palestinian refugees from Syria (PRS) by the

end of 2014.

Figure 1 - official UNHCR figures as of November 6, 2013.

Registered in Grey, awaiting registration in Green

(Gough, 2013)

With the majority of Syrian refugees

hosted in areas with most vulnerable

Lebanese (UN, 2013, p. 3), Host

community have a general feeling that

they are accommodating an “endless

stream of vulnerable refugees without

commensurate support” (Ibid).

Curfews imposed on refugees in

various local villages, eviction and

land use for informal settlements are

growing evidence of tension between

the two communities. Intermittent

shelling from Syrian side to Northern

3

and Eastern Lebanese territory is another security threat Lebanese community suffers.

Funding shortfalls coupled with massive daily influx mean that more Syrians are

vulnerable to face extreme hardship with mounting pressure on host communities.

Figure 2 below shows the living formality coincided in most refugee settlements

around Lebanon.

Figure 2 – High Density Refugee informality on rented private land

in Aqbieh, Lebanon (Manaf

Abdulghani 2013)

Lebanon has 12 official

UNRWA-run camps for

Palestinian refugees,

and they are stretched

out to a critical point

(Johansen, 2013). Most

Syrian and Palestinian

refugees who crossed in

the past three years into Lebanon are settling next to host community or in

overcrowded unofficial camps where rents are incredibly cheap but houses are close

to collapse (Ibid) (See Figure 3 below). Gatherings on private lands are the main

hosting grounds for Palestinian refugees from Syria (PRS). Neither UNHCR nor

NGOs are mandated to provide assistance to refugees in these areas due to conflict of

assistance (ibid).

Figure 3 - Type of Accommodation available to Refugees in Lebanon, (Statistic Lebanon LTD, 2013)

4

Since the establishment of the first refugee camp, Lebanon denied civil rights to its

Palestinian “guests” who overstayed their welcome. As a result, Palestinian suffered

inability to own property or

practice the socio-economic

right to work and attain a legal

status. Now it seems the

Syrian refugees are facing

similar conditions (Ibid).

Growing large in numbers,

refugees are pushed to

appropriate space informally

in the face of property rights

privation.

Figure 4 - Additional rooms by community,

Wadi Khaled, Lebanon, (PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution, 2012)

The majority of refugees in Lebanon live in substandard conditions with 67% renting

basic flats or houses, half of which are overcrowded with several refugee families

sharing limited space. On the other hand, 30% live in tents or other insecure

conditions in makeshift shelters, tents, unfinished buildings, garages, worksites or

warehouses. However, “less than 6% share with Lebanese families” (Statistic

Lebanon LTD, 2013). Not to mention that “50% pay more than US $200 per month

for their accommodation” (ibid).

Figure 5 - Refugee Accommodation

Cost in Lebanon, (Statistic Lebanon

LTD, 2013)

Moreover, “71.99% of the

accommodations available

to refugees need repair”

(Statistic Lebanon LTD,

2013) and just over 30% of

the refugees in Wadi

Khaled, North of Lebanon

share their accommodation with Lebanese family, possibly due to their links and

familial relations (ibid). See Figure 6 - Refugee Accommodation Physical Condition in Lebanon

5

Figure 6 - Refugee Accommodation Physical Condition in Lebanon (Statistic Lebanon LTD, 2013)

“About 1.2 million Lebanese are affected directly and indirectly by the refugee

situation” said Ramzi Naaman, Director of the National Poverty Programme, council

of ministers (CM) (BRIC, 2013, p. 37). MOSA is trying hard to affirm social

cohesion, whereas, host communities fight the spread of informal settlements

anxiously. An incident happened recently in the Eastern village in Baalbek, when a

host family burned a refugee camp to the grounds fearing land ownership

complications with 400 refugees settled nearby, explained Hikmet Shreif, a journalist

reporting from the area.

Figure 7 - Torched Syrian

refugee tented settlement by

host community, Baalbek,

Lebanon, (Meuse, 2013)

The right to participate

The plight of a “refugee” compels us to deconstruct and reconstruct the transnational

processes that produce refugees or migrants lacking authorised space, and

excommunicated from “sovereign” civil rights (Soguk, 1999). Granting refugees the

right to participation means that we need to investigate “The privileging of the

citizen/nation/state ensemble as the hierarchical imperative to life activities [being the

6

key to the] narrative of modern political life” (ibid, P.18). But a citizen includes a

“refugee” by virtue of equality as Ranciere (1999) explained how people attempt to

enact equality engaging politically and spatially with democratic practice, and

reconfigure state-society relations which reconfigure the definition of citizenship

itself. Figure 8 - Marginality to Coalition illustrates a possible transition which could transform

marginalisation in coalition.

Figure 8 - Marginality to Coalition (Frediani,

2013)

Recognition of refugees is

essential to equality with

citizens of the host state, so

while Syrians have been

allowed to settle anywhere in

Lebanon, they remained

officially labelled as “people

of concern” and not

“refugees” considering that Lebanon has not signed the 1951 Refugee Convention

that grants the displaced a “refugee status” and similar rights to foreign or native

citizens of the host state (UNHCR, 2011, p. 2). But when urban disasters complexities

arise, there is a huge need to effective partnerships that include local government

authorities as well as local and refugee communities (David Sanderson et al., 2012)

Participatory Politics in Shelter Intervention

The absence of central Lebanese government initiative together with international

agencies reluctance to act, and the daily massive influx have left local municipalities

alone to help “motivated by moral concern” (BRIC, 2013, p. 38). In Rwanda the

World Bank stepped in to set up “community development committees” in order to

respond and establish “decentralisation” that might shift the decision-making powers

to lower community and localised powers. Similarly, “Shuras” or “Councils” were set

up in Afghanistan and replicated by UN-Habitat to create “community forums” that

would fill the gap left by central state breakup (Jarat Chopra et al, 2004). In Lebanon,

some INGOs including PU-AMI and DRC created refugee community committees to

create and manage collective centres and informal settlements in coordination with

CBOs and local municipalities.

Sanoff terms “The visioning” that takes place between community and municipalities

as necessary in order to create the “dialogue” between both (2006, p. 136). Though

INGOs mediated and facilitated “the visioning”, they are still working with an

“Indecisive institutional mind-set” similar to those of UN missions pursued in

Somalia when seeking “consent” from a government that simply ceased to exist

before intervening, ignoring the months of famine plaguing the country (Jarat Chopra

et al, 2004). In Somalia, Cambodia, Kosovo and East Timor interventions were

remarkably the “least resistant” where social and political forms of development were

“natural” and uninfluenced (ibid). Figure 7 below shows how Syrian refugees employ

“participatory politics” using NGO distributed shelter kits to build temporary

solutions that barely accommodate their large household needs, but do not show the

Lebanese government they are getting too comfortable. “Politics, describes Purcell, is

7

necessarily the struggle for hegemony among agents whose relations are irreducibly

conflictual” (2008, p. 68).

Figure 9 - Refugee Community-made

balcony, Saida, Lebanon (PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution,

2012)

The impotence and

failure of NGOs to

protect refugees and

guarantee their “active

participation” in projects

present the need to map

political power structures

ahead of planning an

intervention stated

Pantaleo Creti (2010) referring to WFP, Oxfam and ACF and their humanitarian work

schemes.

Participation as social empowerment

The Emergency Shelter budget requirement by UNHCR Lebanon for 2014 is $

168,083,696 (UNHCR, 2013). The work plan confirms that “Shelter projects will

contain a considerable degree of direct beneficiary participation, thus empowering

refugees to determine their own solutions” (2013, p. 61). UNHCR and some NGOs

designed “the Shelter kits” as effective distributed self-help aid to encourage crisis-

affected community participation, creativity and the freedom to build with high

element of empowerment. The package consists of plastic sheeting, timber, plywood

boards, ironmongery and associated tools. It is technically called “sealing-off kits”

(SOK). It is highly customisable, and creative. It is not considered an infringement to

Lebanese building law that permits “only” temporary lightweight shelter solutions

that can be dismantled anytime.

Most NGOs operating in Lebanon regularly distribute kits as a cheap and less-

political alternative to the individual and collective centre rehabilitation and in

winterisation activities. Technical assistance could be provided by NGOs to

population with no capacity to conduct construction techniques. Other forms of

assistance – when government allows - could take shape of distribution of more

durable construction materials, tools and fixings needed to enable affected community

to live in adequate shelter and transform their “temporary” tents to more “durable”

solutions incrementally (The Sphere Project, 2011, p. 246). Creating what David

Harvey (2012) describes as the process of “commoning” or creating the “dynamic

social relationship” between people and their socially produced space.

8

Figure 10 - Internal Partition by

refugees, Saida, Lebanon, (PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution, 2012)

Sanoff (2006, p. 134)

says that “Increased

participation efforts

bring in more people

who initially have a

lower sense of

community than is

typical for those who

are politically

involved”. Using the kit

allows “People to have

more ownership for the

program’s success if they have had a part in creating it” (Sanoff, 2006, p. 136). It is

creating a “social space” without entering into Heidegger-Levinas debate on

homelessness, where Levinas considered “la maison” a social product and Heidegger

believes that home is the creation of an “individual consciousness”. It is an expression

of agency and creativity.

Figure 11 - Furniture, Akkar, Lebanon,

(PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution, 2012)

9

Top-down Aid

Lebanese government on the other hand pushed top-down solutions by approving a

joint IKEA Foundation shelter solution, which was developed jointly with UNHCR as

allegedly the most durable refugee shelter that is said to last up to 3 years. (See Figure

12 - IKEA Refugee Shelter) It is equipped with solar panels, picture installation

manual that requires no extra tools and assembly kit that weighs nearly 50kg, all for a

mass production cost of $1000 (Ibid). Although, it is a physically more durable

solution that offers an alternative to the 6-month UNHCR conventional canvas tent, it

does not carry the identity of its inhabitants. It is a Swedish shelter that will fail to

represent refugee social condition. It is merely a profligate solution that costed IKEA

$4.3 million dollars which would eventually fall in the interest of IKEA as a

transnational corporation seeking profit and fame beyond the humanitarian façade of

its IKEA Foundation.

On average, refugees spend 12 years in a camp, said an IKEA Foundation

spokesperson. Many children grow up to call this shelter “home”, he added.

According to him, it is a revolutionised tent that could be possibly linked to a life

cycle that includes income, education and better living standards. Ideally, IKEA re-

invented the temporary refugee tent (Figure 12 - IKEA Refugee Shelter) but didn’t probably

give to the idea that “environment works better if citizens are active and involved in

its creation and management instead of being treated as passive consumers” (Sanoff,

2006, p. 133). Five persons participate to erect this pre-designed shelter but it is not a

“representative participation” however (The Sphere Project, 2011, p. 57)

Figure 12 - IKEA Refugee Shelter

10

Participation as a livelihood opportunity

Humanitarian relief agencies generally respond to disasters using guidelines called

“The Sphere Project” which declares that “the inclusion of affected populations in the

consultative process lies at the heart of Sphere’s philosophy” (2011, p. 5). Danish

Refugee Council DRC mainly tenders host-community, municipality selected local

contractors with refugee sub-contractors and workers to enhance social interaction

between the two communities, gain local and municipal support, use locally available

building materials and

generate livelihood activities

for everyone. The

rehabilitation work is usually

discussed and negotiated with

the landowner. It usually

allows refugees to stay rent-

free for 18 months in return

for rehabilitating the selected

collective centres.

Figure 13 – Refugee Community

Subcontractor

in Collective Centre Rehabilitation

in Bekaa, Lebanon. (DRC Collective Centre Rehabilitation,

2013)

Employing refugee sub-contractors in cash for work (CFW) programs encourage

community participation and its sense of ownership in shelter rehabilitation activities

and design. They are viable solutions to create livelihood options for refugees.

Disaster-affected community members participated more in Haiti when paid rather

than when they had to work for free (Carine Clermont et al., 2011, p. 7). Although, in

post-earthquake Haiti, CFW programmes proved to have low-quality results, difficult

to implement and make disaster-affected populations dependant on cash assistance

(Carine Clermont et al., 2011).

On the other hand, Rosner (1984) argues that participatory democracy leads to

political conflict, eventual alienation and costly delays. Such a view has been

incorporated by some NGOs working in emergency shelter in Lebanon when they

sub-contracted the building of

camps to host-community-private

sector contractors with refugee-

community workers as means to

ameliorate tension and incorporate

“local safe building practices,

materials, expertise and capacities

where appropriate” (The Sphere

Project, 2011, p. 262).

Figure 14 - Host-Community Contractor using

Refugee Workforce

in Bekaa, Lebanon (DRC Collective Centre

Rehabilitation, 2013)

11

India’s earthquake of 2001 in Bhuj resulted in government commissioning Gujarat

Urban Development Company for the overall supervision during the implementation

of the recovery plans, whereas private sector in infrastructure planning and review of

building permit applications (Balachandran, 2006). Dind (2006) compares two

approaches used to reconstruct Tapachula, Mexico in 2005 after the devastation

caused by Hurricane Stan, where the government encouraged construction companies

coming from outside the region, whereas locally encouraged Caritas to centre the

affected-community in the management of the construction of their own shelters. The

process empowered community networks and supported the local economy.

Premiere Urgence – Aide Medicale Internationale (PU-AMI) an INGO worked on a

shelter rehabilitation project to benefit Palestine refugees living in Ein El helweh

Camp (EEH) in Saida, South of Lebanon in 2009.

Figure 15 - Contractor vs Community

Work, (PU-AMI, 2009)

The approach adopted,

arguably, the realisation

of Code Principle 1 of

the Sphere (p.55):

“people-centred

humanitarian approach”

by implementing the

project without

contractors or subcontractors. Whereby, beneficiaries hired to implement the work

from inception to handover, with minor technical guidance from PU-AMI. The

rationale for adopting the method was represented in the following:

1- Empower the community through forming autonomous committees and

holding frequent focus group discussions to consult with them about the most

suited solutions.

2- Improve the quality of main work (see Figure 15 above)

3- Reduce housing rehabilitation unit cost by not using a contractor

4- Cash for work to community and income generation possibility

5- Train community members on construction techniques

Some of the disadvantages include;

1- Long procedure and negotiation with each beneficiary

2- Full time administrative team must be present on-site

See figures 16 & 17.

12

Figure 16 - Ring beam implemented by Refugee Community, (PU-AMI, 2009)

Figure 17 - Refugee Community Workers, (PU-AMI, 2009)

13

Conclusion

War refugee crisis contexts render communities vulnerable and traumatised.

Participation in humanitarian response is a platform and a launching pad to include

everyone through an urban experience that reduces emergency, saves lives, enhances

social cohesion, improves livelihoods and create an overall sense of ownership within

the community.

Difficulties represented by the politics of the place and the critical nature of assistance

subvert and sometimes change the nature and methodologies of interventions. Host

communities, local authorities and governmental bureaucracy combined with

worsening job market caused by refugee influx further complicate participatory

approach. Perceiving refugees as “aliens” automatically deprives them from their

social rights to active participation. Moreover, NGOs often yield under governmental

pressure and local community needs and stipulations which limit their scope of work,

like Earnest Gellner said that: NGOs “are a set of diverse non-governmental

institutions which is strong enough to counterbalance the state and, while not

preventing the State from fulfilling its role of keeper of the peace and arbitrator

between major interests, can nevertheless prevent it from dominating and atomising

the rest of society” (1994, p. 5).

Arguably, there is a great potential to engage both refugee and host communities in

activities that could generate income, enhance communication and release the tension

arising from complete segregation that builds up due to camp creation on the outskirts

of metropolis.

Finally, we (practitioners) should always engage host and refugee communities in

equitable participatory interventions that empower, not oppress, the weak and

disempowered, using Sanoff’s “public forum” as an effective way to ensure and

promote participation (2006). It is the capacity that Michael Rios mentioned by “The

ability of practitioners to produce a more inclusive and egalitarian political

community is in large part contingent on their ability to provide leverage for social

groups vis-a`-vis government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private

interests” (2008, p. 215).

14

Bibliography

Balachandran, B., 2006. The reconstruction of Bhuj’, in The role of local government

in reducing the risk of disasters, s.l.: World Bank.

BRIC, 2013. Survey on the Livelihoods of Syrian Refugees in Lebanon, Beirut: Beirut

Research and Innovation Centre.

Carine Clermont et al., D. S. A. S. a. H. S., 2011. Urban disasters – lessons from

Haiti - Study of member agencies’ responses to the earthquake in Port au Prince,

Haiti, January 2010, London: Disaster Emergency Committee.

Creti, P., 2010. REVIEW OF EXISTING APPROACHES, METHODS AND TOOLS

USED BY HUMANITARIAN AGENCIES TO MEASURE LIVELIHOODS, FOOD

INSECURITY AND VULNERABILITY IN URBAN CONTEXTS, Oxford: Oxfam,

WFP.

David Sanderson et al., P. K.-C. &. L. C., 2012. RESPONDING TO URBAN

DISASTERS: LEARNING FROM PREVIOUS RELIEF AND RECOVERY

OPERATIONS, London: ALNAP/ Oversees Development Institute.

Dind, J.-P., 2006. Reconstruction, réduction de la vulnérabilité et développement

durable: La reconstruction de l’habitat en milieu urbain après l’ouragan Stan au

Mexique. s.l.:Université de Lausanne.

DRC Collective Centre Rehabilitation (2013) Manaf Abdulghani.

Frediani, A. A., 2013. Lecture: House vs Home. London: UCL.

Gellner, E., 1994. Conditions of Liberty: Civil Society and Its Rivals. s.l.:Penquin

history.

Gough, D., 2013. The staggering number of Syrian refugees currently in Lebanon.

[Online]

Available at: http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/10/21/the-staggering-number-of-

syrian-refugees-currently-in-lebanon/

[Accessed 12 Jan 2013].

Harvey, D., 2012. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution.

1st ed. Cornwall: Verso.

Jarat Chopra et al, T. H., 2004. Participatory Intervention. Global Governance 10.

Johansen, H., 2013. Influx of Syrian refugees highlights ongoing Palestinian struggles

in Lebanon, s.l.: Middle East Monitor.

Meuse, A., 2013. Syria Deeply. [Online]

Available at: http://beta.syriadeeply.org/2013/12/lebanese-fear-loss-land-syrian-

15

refugees/#.UsF4hP7xvIU

[Accessed 30 Dec 2013].

PU-AMI Shelter Kits Distribution (2012) Manaf Abdulghani.

PU-AMI, 2009. Shelter Rehabilitation in Ein Elhelweh Camp, Saida, Lebanon: PU-

AMI.

Purcell, M., 2008. Recapturing Democracy: Neoliberalization and the Struggle for

Alternative Urban Futures. First ed. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Ranciere, J., 1999. Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy. Minnesota: University of

Minnesota.

Rios, M., 2008. Envisioning Citizenship: Toward a Polity Approach in Urban Design.

Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 13(No. 2), pp. 213-229.

Rod Burgess et al, M. C. a. T. K., 1997. Contemporary Policies for Enablement and

Participation: A critical review. In: The Challenge of Sustainable Cities. Atlantic

Highlands: Zed Books, pp. 138-162.

Rosner, M., 1984. Theories of participatory democracy and the kibbutz.. Haifa:

University of Haifa.

Sanoff, H., 2006. Participatroy Democracy. In: Multiple Views of Participatory

Design. s.l.:s.n., p. 133.

Soguk, N., 1999. States And Strangers: Refugees And Displacements Of Statecraft. 1

ed. s.l.:Univ Of Minnesota Press.

Statistic Lebanon LTD, 2013. SHELTER POLL SURVEY ON SYRIAN REFUGEES IN

LEBANON, Beirut: UNHCR.

The Sphere Project, 2011. The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum

Standards in Humanitarian Response. s.l.:The Sphere Project.

UN, 2013. 2014 Syria Regional Response Plan - Lebanon, Geneva: UN.

UNHCR, 2011. The 1951 CONVENTION relating to the status of refugees AND ITS

1976 PROTOCOL, Geneva: UNHCR.

UNHCR, 2013. Displacement: Global Facts and Figures, s.l.: UNHCR.

UNHCR, 2013. NHCR Global Appeal 2014-2015 Lebanon, Beirut: UNHCR.