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.
The site rehabilitation phase is one in which efforts are made to either return the former area to at least some of its former environmental state or to provide environmental management plans that assist in the land being used for an alternative purpose.
While decommissioning is concerned with the physical confines of a site, environmental rehabilitation extends to what may be considered to be the “environmental footprint” of the formerly used site. Rehabilitation of sites must be seen as an integral part of environmental activities initiated during the care and maintenance phase.
Active participation of women and women’s organisations ensures their active and equal participation in all aspects of early recovery.
All the different sectors of the displaced and host community populations should have representation in decommissioning committees. It should include those from vulnerable groups, those with specific needs, potential residual population, as well as both men and women. Land/property owners of the site should be directly consulted, as their acceptance of timelines and activities is often crucial for success.
Air pollution
Soil pollution
Water pollution
Deforestation
Desertification
Loss of biodiversity and ecosystems
Natural Resource Depletion
Soil erosion
1. Solid and organic waste management
2. Topography and hydrology
3. Water, air, soil pollution
4. Impacts on ecosystems
5. Impacts on natural resources
6. Impacts of wells, latrines, gullies
7. Conflict regarding rights of access and use of the site
1. Site decommissioning and handover include removal of shelters and infrastructure. This can create a lot of waste if not managed well
2. Decommissioning can involve physical changes/restoration of the ground profiles (topography) and of watercourses, slopes, and vegetation (affecting hydrology/water catchment and groundwater recharge)
3. Site activities and decommissioning activities can cause water, air, and soil pollution – from the release of hazardous substances into the environment or poor management and disposal of waste
4. Site activities may have impacted ecosystems, which may require remediation
5. Natural resources may have been depleted during site construction, site use, or decommissioning. This includes depletion of forests for use as fuelwood or for construction and for charcoal making; the hunting and gathering of animals and other natural resources; the collection and use of local water sources for domestic purposes as well as for livestock; and agriculture.
6. Safety and environmental risks from filled and unfilled latrines, gullies, uncovered wells and other infrastructure can occur
7. Negative impacts can arise from a lack of understanding regarding who owns or operates or has rights to access and use a decommissioned site
1. Create a waste management plan
2. Restore the site profile, drainage, water infiltration, vegetation cover
3. Identify existing pollution, hazardous materials, and potential pollution to ensure air, water, and soil pollution are reversed/prevented
4. Restoration vegetation and ecosystems. Cost-benefit analyses can be used to compare options
5. Assess natural resource depletion and plan for restoration or appropriate alternatives
6. Assess the location, condition, safety, and environmental risks of all infrastructure and determine whether it should be completely removed, repurposed, improved and handed over to others, or made safe
7. Understand and address potential conflict regarding ownership, maintenance, use, and access rights.
1. Create a waste management plan to ensure the careful dismantling of shelters, identifying all items that can be transported for re-use; separating any hazardous items for controlled disposal and any items for recyling. If materials are not to be transported to a resettlement site, develop a plan for proper fair and transparent disposal, distribution, or handover of assets and infrastructure, e.g. to local authorities, local community groups, or national authorities
2. Ensure the site is returned to its previous condition unless alternative plans have been developed and agreed upon by national authorities or surrounding communities. This may include restoring previous ground profiles, watercourses, slopes, and vegetation
3. Ensure the waste management plan identifies existing pollution, hazardous materials, and potential pollution from decommissioning and restoration activities. Plan to avoid air, water, and soil pollution
4. Plan for the physical restoration of plants, fauna, and functioning ecosystems. This can include replanting trees/forests, grasses, shrubs, restoring water sources, and improving soil quality; providing light or shade. If damage looks irreversible, it could include the provision of alternative development benefits to the area affected. Ensure participation of the local population in rehabilitation activities to ensure they meet their long-term needs. Cost-benefit analyses can be used to compare the costs and benefits of alternative options for site restoration.
5. Assess whether natural resources have been depleted during site construction, use, or decommissioning. Plan for their restoration or the provision of appropriate alternatives. This includes restoring ground drainage and rainwater infiltration conditions; replanting trees and indigenous plants; restoring water resources and potentially restoring or compensating for the loss of gravel, stone, clay, peat, etc.
6. Assess the location, condition, safety, and environmental risks from filled and unfilled latrines, gullies, and uncovered wells. Ensure latrines, rubbish pits, and washing facilities are properly decommissioned. Assess all infrastructure and determine whether it should be completely removed, repurposed, improved, handed over to others, or made safe. This could include gulley erosion repair; road repair; watershed rehabilitation; electricity, water, and sewerage facilities;
7. Plan to understand and address potential conflict regarding site ownership, maintenance, use, and access rights. This could include supporting writing clear agreements between local authorities and community groups; supporting individuals or groups in securing land tenure agreements; supporting income-generating initiatives; environmental education and awareness-raising; community outreach services in terms of sanitation, health, and education; and school/health centre construction and provision of essential furnishings and materials.
The rapid return process caught the humanitarian community off guard. The host community wished to reclaim their land for agricultural purposes but found it littered with derelict shelters, open pit latrines, and infrastructure with no clear ownership. Protection risks also increased as empty huts were reported to be used by perpetrators of sexual violence, thieves, and criminals; children also used them as latrines which directly increased the potential for epidemics. The CCCM Cluster was tasked to develop and pilot a camp phase-out and closure program, which was later used as the flagship model for the rest of Northern Uganda and is the basis for this case study.
· Identification of camps selected for phase-out and closure: A threshold of 50% of population departure was used to raise the discussion on camp phase-out and closure. A mixed committee of national officials and humanitarian actors determined whether a camp should be officially closed and if phaseout activities should be initiated.
· Camp-level participatory assessments, preparation, and planning: Using an age, gender, diversity, mainstreaming methodology, multiple meetings were conducted with representatives of host communities, local authorities, and residual IDP population. This happened in consultation with the humanitarian community to identify gaps and priorities in site re-habilitation.
· Primary camp clean-up: Including knocking down partial and remaining shelters, disabling and backfilling pit latrines and garbage pits, and conducting overall cleaning and leveling of the site.
· Camp-level participatory assessments, preparation, and planning: Using an age, gender, diversity, main-streaming methodology, multiple meetings were conducted with representatives of host communities, local authorities, and residual IDP population. This happened in consultation with the humanitarian community to identify gaps and priorities in site re-habilitation.
· Primary camp clean-up: Including knocking down partial and remaining shelters, disabling and backfilling pit latrines and garbage pits, and conducting overall cleaning and leveling of the site.
· Secondary specific rehabilitation: Additional activities were prioritized by the host community, including infrastructure rehabilitation, tree planting, and erosion mitigation. Official handover of NGO infrastructure to local authorities: This included liaising with NGOs that had installed infrastructure and since left with no clear handover guidance.
Percentage of site actively recovering from decommissioned use.
Prevention of environmental damage
Mitigation of environmental damage
Environmental enhancement
Field and desktop research to understand environmental impacts from site clearance, construction, and use and to develop decommissioning and restoration activities.
Additional time, research, and specialization to introduce environmental recovery strategies for sites facing hazardous/toxic waste or pollution.