Reply on DGroups | 2 comments

14 Jul 2020, 2:39 p.m.

Tenzin Manell

Thanks, Lili

We know now that CVA has the potential to support Protection outcomes in the protection sector, such as supporting GBV survivors' recovery. For example, increasing access to health or legal service, reducing reliance on risky coping strategies, reducing exposure to or the consequences of an incident of sexual exploitation and abuse or intimate partner violence.

We also know that GBV survivors are often excluded from CVA and that GBV has been exacerbated by COVID-19 as services are harder to access and affected populations are harder to reach in the face of quarantine, lock down, etc.

Assessing protection markets (e.g. birth registry, legal services, alternative care, health, education, etc.) is a key step to leveraging CVA in survivors' recovery, where CVA is appropriate for specific cases.

I am very interested to learn from colleagues your experience (challenges, opportunities, lessons learned):

a. How have you gone about assessing protection markets before/since COVID-19 in the context(s) where you are working?

b. if you have been supporting Protection colleagues, how have you coordinated with protection specialists to tailored CVA referrals for survivors (i.e. what adaptations have you made to delivery mechanism, frequency, duration, value, activities and services paired with CVA) to ensure inclusion of the most marginalized (e.g. women, persons with disabilities, individuals with non-conforming gender identities and sexual orientations)?

c. if you haven't been using CVA for Protection outcomes, and you are using CVA for other sectoral/multi-sectoral outcomes, how are you tailoring the delivery of CVA to ensure inclusion of the most marginalized?

So excited for your insights!

Also, inviting everyone to look at WRC's CVA and GBV resources here, including tools, trainings, video and case studies:



01 Jul 2020, 9:05 a.m.

LIli Mohiddin

Hello MiC Community (and hello to any new members),

Welcome back to the MiC online discussion series on market-based programming in the COVID era. We have addressed a different topic each week and many thanks to all for your engagement and participation. This week we will discuss the topic: Protection, Inclusion and Market Interventions

Over the next 48 hours we will post some questions each with its own #hashtag (see below). To find the questions on this topic most interesting to you look for the #hashtag in the subject title of the discussion group or email and reply directly to that thread by either: (a) via website - clicking on the discussion on the website and replying to the last contribution or (b) via email - clicking 'reply' on the email and this will redirect the response to the right thread. To avoid posts inundating people’s in-boxes, please focus on quality and not quantity.

Discussion Questions:
Economic recovery activities should target groups or individuals that are capable of sustaining and expanding their economic activity into the future. Should vulnerable groups lack the ability to sustain an activity they are best served if, in addition to livelihood support, they receive cash transfers and other social safety-net interventions as well as capacity-building to build skills for the future. Such supplemental interventions should recognize the specific needs, capacities, and risks of sub-groups (e.g. women, people with disabilities, non-conforming gender identities and sexual orientations) to ensure inclusion, protection, and efficacy.

* What type of government safety net interventions are being discussed/planned/implemented in your given context that also reflect a market aware or market-based approach/lens?

* What adaptations/interventions are happening in your programming that link inclusion and market-based interventions?

For example #inclusiveinterventions:
A rise in forced evictions from lack of income due to Covid-19 measures and restrictions is being seen in Kampala and cities and towns across the region. Programming and advocacy to address the rental and basic needs of vulnerable, Covid-affected households is needed and taking place, on the basis of market analysis. Supporting household livelihoods and income gap is needed and will follow, once restrictions and barriers lift. Importantly, to address the policy environment, advocacy to governments and local authorities to put in place regulations to stop evictions from property is also required. Some positive examples include: In Uganda, the Ministry of Lands halted all kinds of land evictions while the country was on lockdown. This was part of an interim land management guideline issued by the Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development. The directive stated that no tenant will be evicted during the lockdown period. The Land Information System (LIS) and registries were also closed just to ensure that no land services will were available to landowners or agents as no transactions could take place. In Somalia, the Baidoa District Administration, has issued an official directive suspending evictions in Baidoa during Covid-19. The mayor of Baidoa issued a warning of legal action for landowners who disobey the directive. While enforcement and monitoring will likely remain a challenge, the directive shows intent and a route that can be replicated across the region.

Please let us know your thoughts and questions and get the discussion going!

All the best,


Lili Mohiddin
Regional Cash and Markets Adviser
East Africa & Yemen Regional Office
El Molo drive, Lavington, Nairobi, Kenya. P.O. Box 21211 - 00100 GPO
Mobile: +254 721 438015
Skype: lilimohiddin
Norwegian Refugee Council <http:""/>| Facebook <https:"" norwegianrefugeecouncil=""> | Twitter <https:"" nrc_norway="">