VEHA
Guidance
Guidance
Virtual Environmental and Humanitarian Adviser Tool – (VEHA Tool) is a tool
to easily integrate environmental considerations in humanitarian response. Field Implementation guidances are useful for the design and execution of humanitarian activities in the field.
Like all types of the humanitarian operations, Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA) can have environmental impacts, whether these are local (waste, soil pollution, etc.) or global (Co2 emissions). These impacts are more difficult to trace for CVA than for ‘in-kind’ programmes, because, in the vast majority of cases, humanitarian actors do not control how the beneficiaries spend their cash.
Juliet Lang, OCHA Cash Adviser gave a short introduction to CTP, stressing that it can be very effective by giving affected people a means to decide and prioritize interventions according to their needs. Cash transfer programming can be provided on different levels (individual, household, community) and in different formats (Conditional/unconditional, restricted/unrestricted, or for multiple purposes). To be successful and effective, the level that CTPs should address as well as the format they should be provided in requires careful consideration. Also, aspects such as monitoring of impacts and outcomes, gender sensitivity, and environmental factors have to be considered to ensure the effectiveness and quality of CTPs
Air pollution
Deforestation
Climate Change
Loss of biodiversity and ecosystems
Natural resource depletion
Soil erosion
Like all forms of assistance, CVA has the potential to contribute to negative or positive environmental impacts. These may include:
1. CVA being used to purchase items that are OR are not made in a sustainable way.
2. Encouraging more OR less sustainability, regarding methods of consumption, such as the use of natural resources.
3. Exacerbating or reducing environmentally damaging survival strategies such as using cash to unsustainably exploit natural resources OR using vouchers to purchase sustainable or less polluting items.
4. Disincentivising or encouraging local businesses in supplying more sustainable products and adopting greener practices, such as reduced packaging and waste..
1. Poorly planned CVA can encourage the purchase of items that are polluting and create unnecessary waste OR can alternatively be implemented in a manner that promotes the purchase and use of less polluting items that create less waste and that are produced in more sustainable ways, such as using renewable energy, or reducing waste and pollution
2. Encouraging more OR less sustainable, regarding methods of consumption, such as unsustainable exploitation of natural resources such as timber, water, clay, stone; or supporting their sustainable use or replenishment.
3. Exacerbating or reducing environmentally damaging survival strategies such as using cash to unsustainably exploit natural resources (e.g. open cast mining, or charcoal production) OR using vouchers to purchase sustainable or less polluting items
4. Disincentivising or encouraging local businesses in sourcing and supplying more sustainable products made from recycled or renewable or less polluting materials, and adopting greener practices, such as reduced packaging and waste; reduced use of fossil fuels, water, and chemicals in manufacture.
1. Vouchers can be made conditional or restricted to items that are known to be more sustainable
2. Vouchers can be restricted to items that do not unsustainably deplete local or remote natural resources
3. Use of vouchers can ensure purchase of pre-identified priority items, supported by training that increases awareness of sustainable practices
4. Businesses/traders can be supported in sourcing and supplying sustainable, less polluting products.
1. Training should be provided for CVA practitioners in the potential for environmental harm or benefits and the direct impact this can have on the future resilience of beneficiaries. Training can include the design of vouchers that are conditional or restricted to items that are known to be more sustainable
2. CVA practitioners can be required to coordinate with the Environment in the Humanitarian Action community and other initiatives to green humanitarian aid, to collaborate in the environmental strengthening of cash assistance. For example, vouchers can be restricted to items that do not unsustainably deplete local or remote natural resources
3. Use of vouchers can ensure purchase of pre-identified priority items, supported by training that increases awareness of sustainable practices
4a. Always consider the environmental impacts of CVA, of items purchased, and of the supply chain when planning, designing, and implementing CBIs and CRIs. Continue to monitor impacts on the environment over the life of the programme. Businesses/traders can be supported in sourcing and supplying sustainable, less polluting products. Market assessments can be expanded to assess the environmental sustainability of products, transport, manufacturing processes (energy, water, waste), packaging, etc
4b. You can use the practical environmental checklist to inform your CVA design. It includes these key recommendations:
– Know better: your supply chains, whether they are local or international; which humanitarian support relies on cash and CRI modalities. Transport-related impacts are often small, and it is much better to select more environmentally sustainable products of good quality, manufactured using sustainable, non / lower polluting production, packaging, waste management, and distribution methods rather than to assume that local or international is better for the environment.
– Take advantage: of the opportunity to reduce emissions from transportation in situations where local environmentally preferable production processes exist, and quality durable products are available, by encouraging displaced populations to purchase those local environmentally sustainably produced products; Set up procurement agreements that require suppliers to reduce packaging/packaging weight and use efficient vehicles, and lowest emission transport routes.
– Take into account: end of life disposal of items, as some products may be biodegradable (if made of natural materials), commonly re-used or repurposed, or recycled (e.g. corrugated steel sheets). Write requirements into supplier agreements for reusable, repurposable, recyclable, or biodegradable items.
– Be mindful: that the durability of products is a key environmental influencer. Without incentives or increased awareness, cash recipients are likely to minimise cost rather than valuing durability, thus matching product performance with the context of use. Plan to ensure your CVA programme does not encourage the use of single-use disposable plastics etc
– Influence & encourage: cash beneficiaries through increased information, awareness or targeted communication, to minimise environmental impacts in the purchasing choices that they make; explore the use of restricted vouchers to promote sustainable behaviour where necessary.
– Consider: in the market assessment, the potential environmental impacts of items available in local markets, as cash assistance may encourage unsustainable extraction of local resources (e.g. wood), which can result in negative environmental impacts, damaging local ecosystems, driving up local prices, leaving beneficiaries less resilient than they were prior to the crisis
– Investigate: sustainable local supply chains and incentivise suppliers and beneficiaries to use them, particularly if a significant increase in demand is likely for some materials (e.g. shelter materials).
Including energy expenditure in the Minimum Expenditure Basket (MEB)
In recent years, more and more organisations involved in CVA have used Minimum Expenditure Baskets43 (rather than just food baskets) to establish the size of their cash transfers (including WFP). According to CaLP, essential needs are defined as “the essential goods, utilities, services or resources required on a regular or seasonal basis by households for ensuring long term survival AND minimum living standards, without resorting to negative coping mechanisms or compromising their health, dignity and essential livelihood assets”.44In practice, the majority of MEBs do not include energy needs, but if they do, they are based on the current needs and expenditure of households, and the CVA does not aim to modify these to make them more eco-friendly. It is this point that should be corrected. However, taking energy-related expenditure into account in MEBs is complex due notably to the fluctuation of household needs (summer/winter, for example)45.
In a safety net programme in Pakistan, Nawaz and Iqbal show that CVA increases the use of modern fuels (electricity and gas) but also increases the share of the household expenditure given to fuels (including wood, coal, kerosene, etc.). They conclude that “[…] the expansion of the cash transfer programme [requires] a reasonable investment in the energy sector to ensure that there is an uninterrupted supply of modern fuels”.46In order for CVA to boost the consumption of energy that is relatively clean (gas) or sustainable (hydro, solar or wind power), these need to be available on the market and beneficiaries must not have other priority areas of expenditure (such as debts that need to be honoured). Operationally, this provides the option of removing energy needs from MEBs and meeting them in kind by giving households access to cleaner energy (such as solar lamps, for example). What is more, the inclusion of energy expenditure in an MEB is not enough to limit the potential negative impacts on the environment of households’ energy consumption (boosted by the CVA). Including access to cleaner (but more expensive) energy in the MEB is not always realistic when people have access to a source of energy that is freely available in their surroundings (for example, wood fuel in rural areas)47. This is one of the reasons that energy expenditure is not systematically included in MEBs. It is, therefore, necessary to think of alternatives (in-kind or using vouchers), on the condition that they really exist on the local market and that importing them is not worse for the environment.
From: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/RapportENVCash_En_GroupeURD_2020.pdf
Access to environmental education and eco-friendly practices by recipients
use of cash with environmentally responsible providers and suppliers
Field and desktop research to understand the local market for a list of businesses and suppliers with minimized environmental implications where cash-based assistance is being provided.
Additional time to develop tools and information on best practices and market analysis of local businesses