Programming Tool 4

Peacebuilding WASH Programming Tool

Purpose

This tool complements the WASH for Peace Programming Guide Section 3. The ‘What’ and ‘How’ of peacebuilding WASH and aims to support the integration of peacebuilding approaches into WASH programming, building on the foundation of conflict sensitivity. WASH for Peace interventions follow the same programming cycle as regular interventions, therefore this tool applies a broad results-based management (RBM) logic integrating dimensions of conflict sensitivity/peacebuilding as relevant. In fragile and conflict-affected contexts (FCCs) conflict sensitivity is a minimum requirement of all UNICEF-supported programmes and interventions, while opportunities to pursue peacebuilding should be considered.

Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding?

A preliminary step in programme design in FCCs is to determine whether an intervention should be conflict sensitive only or whether opportunities to also integrate peacebuilding exist and can be leveraged – the questions below can help WASH teams make that decision in consultation with relevant internal and external stakeholders:

Is addressing the conflict causes/drivers central to effective delivery/children’s rights in your context?
Is addressing the conflict causes/drivers within the capacity of UNICEF’s WASH programmes; can UNICEF influence the conflict causes/drivers?
Is the operational (e.g. security, safety of staff and other stakeholders) and political/institutional (e.g. acceptance of UNICEF engaging, opportunities to advocate for that space to be created) context favourable?
Do relevant capacities in conflict sensitivity and peacebuilding (key staff, implementing partners, and participating communities) exist or can they be developed?
Are sufficient resources (e.g. staff time and funding) available to effectively implement conflict sensitive/peacebuilding programming to avoid doing harm through inadequate implementation?
Are key stakeholders within UNICEF (country/field office, regional office, headquarters) and outside UNICEF (government, partners, communities) supportive/committed to engaging?
Are donor partners supportive of the approach (i.e. adaptive programming, peacebuilding outcomes)?

Step 1: Defining the peacebuilding approach for your WASH intervention

Peacebuilding as a Primary or Secondary Objective?

The findings of the CP Scan should give WASH teams the necessary information to determine, in the first instance, whether a primary focus on peacebuilding is required or relevant:

If water/WASH is a critical dimension of conflict (e.g. water user conflict, exclusion from WASH) then peacebuilding as a primary objective should be considered;
If there are relevant interactions between broader conflict and WASH (conflict impacts on WASH, WASH intervention in conflict-affected context) then a peacebuilding secondary objective should be considered.

Can a direct and explicit approach to peacebuilding be pursued?

The guiding questions below can help WASH teams determine whether the operational environment is suitable for UNICEF and WASH to pursue peacebuilding as a primary objective for programmes and interventions, and to determine how explicitly or implicitly such an approach should be integrated:

Do existing national/local plans and policies mention conflict and peace as relevant dimensions of children’s rights?
Do credible national/local peacebuilding processes exist e.g. truth and reconciliation commission, inter-communal national or local dialogue?
Are there dedicated and inclusive peacebuilding institutions at national/local levels engaging government and civil society?
Have government/WASH sector counterparts participated constructively in a UNICEF conflict analysis (e.g. SitAn, sector specific)
Are there other relevant stakeholders (international and/or national NGOs, faith-based institutions, CS, community-based structures) that explicitly work on conflict/peace, and are they free to carry out their work?
Are there potential/actual WASH implementing partners that have capacity/willingness to explicitly engage in such programming?
Are other sectors already integrating peacebuilding approaches, including within UNICEF programmes, and do opportunities exist to embed WASH within multisectoral interventions to build and sustain peace?

Step 2: Developing conflict sensitive and peacebuilding WASH Theories of Change

See Programming Tool 2 ‘WASH for Peace ToC Tool’, and WASH for Peace Programming Guide Step 2 ‘Developing peacebuilding WASH theories of change’

Step 3: Defining WASH contributions to peace outcomes – enabling environment, vertical social cohesion, horizontal social cohesion, and individual capacities for peace

Examples of WASH contributions to peace outcomes

Enabling environment for child rights-based and positive peace	Support the adoption of age-, gender-, and conflict-sensitive and pro-peace norms, policies and practices among key WASH stakeholders (duty-bearers and rights-holders) globally and in FCCs, so the impacts of fragility and conflict on children, young people and women’s access to WASH is reduced, e.g. through evidence-based advocacy, WASH for Peace SBC interventions
Vertical social cohesion contributions – Strengthening sector-governance and institutional accountability	Strengthen systems and structures, as well as their policies, focused on equity-oriented and evidence-based WASH services management at all levels of society: local (with communities), intermediate (with states, provinces, districts, municipalities, etc.) and national; and with all stakeholders – government, communities, local and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. Strengthen systems and structures, as well as their policies, focused on equity-oriented and evidence-based WASH services management at all levels of society: local (with communities), intermediate (with states, provinces, districts, municipalities, etc.) and national; and with all stakeholders – government, communities, local and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. Support grass-roots organizations and civil society to better articulate their needs and rights vis-à-vis access to WASH services. Strengthen governance mechanisms for local-level ongoing consultations involving representation of all groups for WASH service delivery. Enhance institutional understanding of local resource pressures which result in water-related conflicts and enhancing structures for resolving them. Also, note the impact of commercial use of water resources in water-scarce environments; for example, relating to mining, hydropower installations and agro-businesses. Strengthen good governance through capacity development and system-strengthening approaches like orientation, training, experience sharing and exchanges.
Horizontal social cohesion contributions – Community-level programming entry points	Implement joint collaborative water development projects that facilitate constructive and safe contact between divided groups and help transform past sources of conflict, or ‘dividers’ into new ‘connectors’, linking people across conflict lines. Create incentives for joint action and providing platforms for collaboration that allow for trust and social cohesion to grow at the community level. Understand, value, recover, utilize, strengthen and leverage informal and indigenous systems for managing water as potential connectors.
Individual capacities for peace – Developing competencies and skills	Enhance individual understanding of the peacebuilding potential of WASH services, as a common need that can be a connector within a community rather than a divider. Enhance the peacebuilding competencies of individuals engaged in inclusive water management activities to support conciliatory, trustful, collaborative behaviours and their ability to resolve disputes and conflicts. Strengthen the resilience of individuals to better cope with the negative impacts of conflict.

Step 4: Identifying and leveraging peacebuilding WASH programmatic entry points

The choice of entry point will be informed by the findings of the CP Scan and context-specific opportunities that will determine the most conducive approach. Below are a number of broad questions that can kick-start a discussion engaging relevant stakeholders (internal/external to UNICEF) in such a process – whether it is to inform a broader sector/country office WASH for Peace strategy or a more focused programme or localized intervention:

What are key WASH–conflict interactions identified through your analysis (CP Scan) e.g. is any specific aspect of WASH services/resources a driver of conflict or a driver of peace?

What issues and dimensions of WASH services/resources are most relevant, prominent, and/or pressing that could contribute to an escalation of conflict if left unaddressed e.g. grievances about exclusion from WASH services, disputes over scarce water resources, low participation and weak governance of WASH services, etc.?

What current/upcoming UNICEF WASH programmes (stand-alone or multi-sectorial) can integrate conflict sensitive/peacebuilding approaches and pursue peace outcomes as primary or secondary objectives e.g. donor willingness, staff/partner capacity, advantageous institutional and operational environment?

Conducive programmatic entry points
See the Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding Programming Guide’s Step 4 – Identifying and leveraging peacebuilding WASH programmatic entry points

Peace dividends through WASH investments
Strengthening WASH sector governance to improve social cohesion
Leveraging WASH services (including water resource management) to address conflict causes – urban and rural water source identification/distribution, environmental and social safeguarding, WASH committees, Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) initiatives, and multisectoral/institutional WASH.
Promoting water security – strengthening climate resilience, protecting WASH infrastructure and services, and tackling transboundary water conflicts
Adoption of a ‘triple nexus approach’ to leverage and strengthen WiE programming in FCCs

Specific WASH in Emergencies entry points

WASH Severity Classification (WSC), a tool for more contextual analysis that could be strengthened to capture conflict-related risks/vulnerabilities.
Accountability, Quality and Assurance Framework (AQAF); an AAP framework that includes surveys on perceptions and safety that could be adapted to consider conflict and strengthen conflict sensitivity.
Some WCCs use safety audits that include questions to capture relevant dimensions of conflict interactions with WASH.
The overall HNO/HRP process could be used by UNICEF WASH in Emergency staff and WCCs to advocate for the inclusion of conflict prevalence/social cohesion deficits as a dimension of ‘needs’/’impact’, and thus conflict sensitivity and peacebuilding approaches as a dimension of the response.
Funding and emergency appeals: WASH Cluster partners can integrate conflict sensitivity/peacebuilding approaches and considerations into national-level funding opportunities and appeals; if approved this will support and encourage the integration of conflict sensitivity/peacebuilding across WASH Cluster and sector partner activities.

Sample WASH for Peace messages

Visit the page

Search UNICEF

Programming Tool 4

Peacebuilding WASH Programming Tool

Conflict Sensitivity and Peacebuilding Programming

Programming Tool 1

Programming Tool 2

Programming Tool 3

Programming Tool 5

Programming Tool 6

Programming Tool 7

Programming Tool 8