[Xavier Devictor] Two days from now, we will mark World Refugee Days, a world refugee day,   an opportunity to keep in our minds those who have been displaced by conflict and violence,   and who live in a country, which is not theirs.  But this will be a somewhat special world refugee day,   because we live in a world where the number of refugees has been constantly increasing.  Over the last ten years, it has essentially tripled.  At the same time, external assistance has been flat.  That means less money per refugee.  That means that a number of models that have been developed   over the last decades are essentially no longer sustainable.  And the challenge for all of us is, therefore,   to find a more effective and more sustainable way to support refugees and host communities.  Here at the World Bank, we've been working with a number of host countries and donor countries   to try and assess the cost of hosting refugees and ways to reduce these costs.  What we wanted to do today is to start with a series of presentations about this work at a global level,   but also in three specific countries, Kenya, Uganda, and Jordan.  And following this set of presentations,   we wanted to have a conversation with a set of distinguished panelists who represent refugees,   hosting countries, UNHCR, the UN refugee agency   with whom we have had a tremendously successful cooperation, and the World Bank.  So, without further ado, let me maybe give the floor to my colleague, Karishma Silva,   who has been one of the leaders behind this work on assessing the cost of hosting refugees.  Many, many thanks. 

[Karishma Silva] Thank you, Xavier.  Hello, everybody.  Sorry, I'm just going to try and move this along.  Okay.  All right.  So, in Xavier's opening remarks, he asked us, how can we support refugees more effectively?  And to answer that question, we asked ourselves, how much does it cost?  Or how much support do refugees need?  How much would it cost to provide that support?  And how can we best meet those costs?  And so, today, I'm going to present the findings around our research on these questions.  So, first, we can measure the cost of supporting refugees   or the cost of meeting their basic needs by using the poverty line.  When we do that, we find that the costs are high   and the amount of aid that is currently available is not sufficient to meet these costs.  Now, currently, the focus has been a lot around assistance and aid,   but what we're going to try and explore here today is whether there is a better approach.  So, host countries can reduce the cost of hosting by letting refugees work.  This creates savings that can be used to invest in the economic development of the host country,   to the benefit of both hosts as well as refugees, and to help the most vulnerable refugees better.  Okay, so, self-reliance is at the center of this new approach.  In order to measure this concept of self-reliance,   what we need is some kind of a minimum standard against which to measure   how well refugees are doing.  And that minimum standard already exists in the poverty line.  The poverty line is a threshold below which an individual cannot meet their minimum basic needs.  We have three different poverty lines, one each for low-income countries,   for lower-middle income countries, and for upper-middle income countries.  And so, very basically, in poverty measurement,   an individual whose income is below the poverty line would be poor,   and a person whose income is above the poverty line would be considered non poor.  So now, using the same standard, the poverty line, to measure self-reliance, what we see is that,   or what we're posing here, is that a refugee is considered self-reliant if they are not poor.  But it matters where this income comes from.  So a refugee is only self-reliant if they achieve this non poor status,   so that their income is above the poverty line, as you see in the last column here.   But that...  But getting above the poverty line comes from their own earnings, which we see in the slight blue box.  Conversely, refugees are not self-reliant if they're poor, as in the first column here,   or if they rely on humanitarian assistance to achieve this non poor status.  Sorry.  Trying to move the slides, and I'm stuck.  Give me a moment, please.  Okay, I'm going to ask if one of my colleagues can help move the slides along to the next one.  Doesn't work.  Okay, so while we're waiting to figure…  While we're waiting for the slides to fix themselves,   we're going to talk about how many refugees, using this measure,   how many refugees are actually self-reliant.  Okay, so we have data on refugee income poverty for only about ten countries.  Let me grab that.  All right, so to recap, we discussed what it means to be self-reliant,   and what we're looking for is that refugees are not poor   and that they achieve this non poor status through their own earnings   rather than through humanitarian assistance.  So now, we're going to look at how many refugees are self-reliant.  We have data on refugee income poverty for ten countries.  In this graph here, we've divided those countries across income groups.  So, low income, low-middle income, and upper-middle income countries.  In the dark blue, we have the share of hosts that are self-reliant,   and in light blue, the share of refugees that are self-reliant.  Now, these ten data points give us some really important insights.  The first is that across the low income and low middle-income countries,   only about 20% of refugees are self-reliant against about 50% of refugees in the middle-income countries.  What we see also is across the board, where we have data,   refugees are less likely to be self-reliant than their hosts,   but this gap between hosts and refugees is dramatically reduced in countries   where refugees are allowed to work without any significant restrictions, like in Colombia and Costa Rica.  All right, so just as we use the poverty line to measure self-reliance,   we can use it to measure the cost of supporting refugees.  As we discussed earlier, the cost of basic needs is essentially the poverty line.  And now, refugees can meet their basic needs   either through their own income in the dark blue here,   or through aid in the light blue.  Right?  So when refugees do not work,   the amount that's needed to meet their basic needs is this light blue section.  And so, the amount of aid required equals the cost of basic needs.  When refugees do work, their income covers some part of their cost of basic needs,   and the amount required in aid falls.  Now, when a refugee is self-reliant, we saw previously,   their own income is above the poverty line,   and so they can meet their basic needs with their own earnings,   which means when refugees are self-reliant, the amount of assistance required is zero.  Now, refugees, the likelihood of a refugee becoming self-reliant depends   on the host country's policies that allow them to work or to move to where jobs are.  When policies are more liberal, refugee income will rise and the amount of assistance will fall.  This creates savings, and these savings can be invested   in the host country's economic development, and as I said before,   to support the most vulnerable refugees.  Refugee income and assistance are communicating vessels.  When refugees earn more income, there's less need for assistance;   and conversely, when refugees earning opportunities are restricted,   either because they're not allowed to work or to move to where the jobs are,   then refugee income will be low and the amount of assistance required will be high.  We use this framework to estimate the cost of meeting the basic needs of refugees,   and that comes to 62 billion, as you can see in the first column here.  But what's important to note is that because refugees work and earn,   their earnings currently cover two thirds of this cost, the 40 billion here.  What that shows is that refugees rely far more on their own earned income   than they do on humanitarian assistance.  The remaining 22 billion is what is required in assistance annually,   but there's a lot of potential to reduce these costs.  In a hypothetical situation where refugees have full economic inclusion,   which means that they have the same earning opportunities as their hosts,   in that case, the income that they would earn would cover 90% of their costs of basic needs,   and the amount of assistance required would fall from 22 billion annually to 6 billion,   even if we don't have full economic inclusion.  Even policies that just support refugees to increase their earnings go a long way   in reducing the cost of assistance.  So, if you had policies that supported refugees to increase their earnings by 25%,   that would half the amount that is required in assistance, from 22 billion to 11.  Now, these examples are illustrative, but they do show the significant potential gains   that could be had from letting refugees work more.  All right.  And so, to end, and I'll spend a little more time on this slide,   we're going to talk about how we reduce poverty amongst refugees.  Okay, so in this graph, we're looking at the composition of the income   that is required to reach the poverty line.  We have a different poverty line for low-income countries,   for lower-middle income countries and upper-middle income countries.  In light blue, we have refugees’ earnings, in dark blue, the humanitarian assistance,   and in orange, the shortfall to bring refugees up to that poverty line.  Okay, so what we see here is that in low-income countries,   refugees’ earnings account for two thirds of their income,   and they receive the remaining one third in humanitarian assistance.  In middle-income countries, refugees’ earnings account for 92% of their income,   and they receive only 8% in assistance.  Now, refugees can escape poverty in two ways.  They can either increase their earnings or they can increase the amount of assistance they receive,   but the scale of the necessary efforts across these two parts is just not comparable.  In middle-income countries, for refugees to meet their basic needs,   they would have to increase their incomes by 18%.  In low-income countries, where poverty is more widespread,   refugees would have to increase their earnings by 67% to meet their basic needs.  But if all of the shortfall were to be met through humanitarian assistance alone,   then the amount of aid required would have to increase   by 120% in low-income countries and by 500% in the upper-middle income countries.  And so, with rising number of refugees and increasing demands on assistance, the path forward is clear.  Let refugees work.  Thank you very much, and I'll hand back to Xavier.

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Karishma, for this very stimulating presentation.  Let me now turn to three colleagues who have worked on specific countries   to illustrate some of these methodologies and some of the findings.  Let me turn to Aziz Atamanov, who's first going to talk about Uganda,   Olive Nsababera, who's going to talk about Kenya,   and Hans (Johannes) Hoogeveen, who's going to talk about Jordan.  Actually, let me start with Olive, and then Aziz, and then Hans.  Thank you so much. 

[Olive Nsababera] Thank you very much, Xavier.  So, I will apply the approach that Karishma has explained to look at self-reliance in Kenya.  To give you some background, Kenya has been generously hosting refugees for over 30 years.  At present, it's estimated that there are about 700,000 refugees.  Majority of those refugees are living in designated camp areas,   and these camps are found in two of the poorest counties in the country.  Now, Kenya has also made tremendous progress   in terms of creating an enabling legal and policy environment   to enable refugees to be able to earn livelihoods.  For example, in 2021, it enacted a refugee act which guaranteed several rights to refugees,   including the right to work, including self-employment,   and also the right to open bank accounts, register for mobile SIM cards, among other rights.  Despite these tremendous strides that the country has done, in practice,   refugees still face numerous obstacles in terms of obtaining work permits or business licenses.  So here, we then use the lens of self-reliance to ask,   how does self-reliance look like for refugees in Kenya   in the different locations in which they are, and also for their hosting communities?  The key takeaway here is that refugees that are in urban areas are more likely to work.  They're about four times as likely to work.  And because of that, they're also more likely to earn more because of where they are.  And also, consequently, they are more likely to be self-reliant.  To dig a bit deeper, this graph here shows you the self-reliance rates   for refugees in different locations and for their hosts.  The bars in blue shows the self-reliance for refugees in camp areas and hosts around those areas,   and the green shows the self-reliance for refugees in urban areas.  So, we see that from the blue graph…  From the blue bars, you can tell that the self-reliance for refugees in camp areas is quite low.  Less than 20% of refugees in the camp locations.  The first location called Turkana County, less than 20% of either refugees or hosts are self-reliant.  Now, if you contrast that to the green bars in urban areas,   you do notice that of nearly 70% of refugees are self-reliant, and even higher for hosts.  So, given these differences that are in self-reliance   between urban areas and areas around the camp, one could then ask,   what if refugees had full economic participation?  That means access to opportunities as hosts do.  So first, we could consider that if they had the refugees in camps,   had those opportunities in the areas around them, so they would essentially be like hosts near the camp.  Here we find that actually, when refugees in camps are unlike their hosts in the area,   their income does not change very much, and their self-reliance does not change very much.  And this is because these areas are found in some of the poorest countries   where market opportunities are very restricted.  But when we consider if refugees were to move to urban areas   and here, for illustrative purposes, we consider Nairobi, the capital.  We find that when refugees want to move in Nairobi,   then their earnings potential increases and their ability to be self-reliant is much higher.  This raises several implications.  First, as I mentioned at the beginning,   the refugee camps are in some of the poorest counties in the country,   as you can see from this map, which shows the poverty rates of Kenya,   where the darker the shade, the higher the poverty.  So, you notice that the camps are in areas that are very poor.  So then, this implies that in terms of strategies going forward, area development,   economic development around these areas can be seen   as part of the strategy to close gaps and disparities in living standards,   market opportunities between geographic regions in Kenya.  At the same time, our results also suggest that there could be scope   to facilitate self-reliance for refugees by enabling them to move   to areas that have higher market opportunities   and where they can access jobs and be able to become self-reliant.  Thank you very much. 

[Aziz Atamanov] Okay.  Thank you very much, Olive.  My name is Aziz.  I'm going to talk about the role of land in achieving self-reliance in Uganda.  Uganda is a very interesting case to study,   not only because Uganda hosts the largest number of refugees in Africa, 1.5 million,   but also because Uganda offers a very generous and very friendly support to refugees.  Refugees in Uganda don't live in camps, they live in settlements,   they can move freely, they have right to work,   and most importantly, they have access to land for housing and crop cultivation.  So, in terms of the key messages,   we found out that land is crucial for self-reliance of refugees in Uganda,   but only if it is of adequate size.  The problem is that there are only a few refugees who have this adequate size of land.  As refugee numbers grow, it's hard to expect that the size of land will increase.  Most likely, it's going to shrink.  In these circumstances, increasing land productivity,   and also helping refugees to find non farm opportunities is important, but it requires a lot of investment.  Before I talk about land, let me remind that Uganda,   even though it offers a very generous support, it's a poor country.  The poverty rate among the hosts is around 40%.  Refugees are even more poor.  The poverty rate is about 70% and self-reliance is relatively small.  Only 14% of refugees are self-reliant.  So, what about land?  Does land help to achieve self-reliance?  It surely does.  Land is crucial for self-reliance, but only if it is of adequate size.  You can see it on the figure on the left.  So, basically this figure shows you the share of refugees who are self-reliant by the land size.  You have three groups of households, those who have land higher than 0.05 hectares per person,   it's a green bar; and the next two bars are for households   which have land size less than this amount, and also for households who do not have land.  You can see that the green bar is the tallest one.  Among those refugees who have land, adequate size of land, let's call it like this,   30% are self-reliant; but this share falls dramatically for those refugees who have smaller size of land.  The most striking is that there is no difference between refugees   who do not have land and those refugees who have small size of land.  The natural question is how many refugees have this adequate size of land.  It is shown in the figure on the right, it shows the distribution of refugees by land size.  You can see that 45% of refugees do not have land at all, 38% have small size of land,   and only 17% of refugees have adequate size of land, which allows them to achieve self-reliance.  So, what about costs and savings Uganda is making by allowing refugees to work and have land?  Imagine Uganda doesn't allow refugees to work and have land.  Overall costs will be 515 million dollars, the left bar on the figure;   but Uganda allows refugees to work and have land, so it allows the country to save around 225 million.  So, refugees earn this amount of money   and it allows to reduce the costs of hosting refugees for international community.  Can this benefit be increased?  Yes, they can.  We know the limitation factor.  At least one of the most important limitation factor is low access to land and small size of land.  Moreover, a growing population in Uganda and also among refugees, land degradation,   extreme weather events like droughts, flooding,   all these events will limit the role of land and agriculture for self-reliance.  So, in these circumstances,   it is important to increase the productivity of land   and also support refugees to access non farm opportunities as well, outside of agriculture.  These savings Uganda is making can be used for these purposes.  Thank you very much. 

[Johannes Hoogeveen] Morning, my name is Johannes Hoogeveen.  I'll be talking about Jordan.  Like my colleagues mentioned in Kenya and Uganda, Jordan has been very generous in…  That's wrong, this direction.  …has been very generous hosting refugees.  When many of the countries around Jordan were in conflict,   people of Jordan stood up and hosted many of their neighbors.  Not only did they welcome their less fortunate brothers and sisters,   they gave them the right to work, they allowed their children to go to school, to public schools,   they allowed all the refugees to make use of the public health system.  They also allowed refugees to choose where they want to live.  People live in camps about 20%, but another 80% chooses to live elsewhere in the country,   many in Amman, the capital city, but also elsewhere.  So, when we did our research, what do we find?  Well, the first thing we find is that the refugees demonstrate a very strong preference for self-reliance.  Secondly, we do find that the aid that is available,   and there's a lot of aid going to Jordan,   is still not enough to bring all the refugees up to the poverty line.  We also do find that refugees face challenges when they access the labor market,   because, yes, they can access [it], but they cannot access [it] everywhere.  They're mostly confined to the unskilled labor sector.  Despite all this, we do find that Jordan generates a lot of savings on the aid   that would have been needed otherwise if refugees were not allowed to work.  The amount of money that's saved on an annual basis, we estimate is about 860 million dollars.  So, let me make a small advertisement for the booklet that we are about to launch today.  If you go to the events website, you'll find a link to it as well.  So, let me turn to the question of poverty and self-reliance.  When we look at poverty for refugees who live either in camp or out of camp,   on the left side of the graph, we find that refugees in camp are a lot less likely to be poor.  Poverty is high, don't get me wrong, but poverty for refugees outside camp is much higher.  And remember that many more refugees prefer to live outside camp than live in camps.  If we look at self-reliance, the picture changes.  Those who live outside camp are much more likely to be self-reliant than refugees who live in camp.  And that's maybe not very surprising.  These camps are in isolated areas.  It's simply hard to find a job.  Still, this picture presents a puzzle.  Because why would someone prefer the likelihood of being poor when you can actually live in the camp?  In fact, why would you expose yourself to the stress,   to the financial stress of living outside the camp when you can live in camp?  Why would you expose yourself to a situation   where you know you will receive a lot less assistance than you would otherwise?  If I pose it that way, maybe it's a puzzle; but of course, if we think about it, it's not really a puzzle.  People like to have agency.  People enjoy their freedom.  People like to work.  People want to have the ability to improve their own lives and the lives of their children.  So, in many ways, we think that these findings demonstrate   that refugees really have a revealed preference for self-reliance.  Now, what does all this work mean in terms of cost?  Well, if we were to look at the situation where no refugee would be allowed to work,   and in the case of Jordan, we not only take into account basic needs,   but also the cost for health and education, we would have to spend about 1.9 billion dollars every year.  That is not what's needed now.  Because of refugees working, that amount drops to about 900 million every year.  Still a huge amount, but it's basically a savings of 860 million dollars every year.  Would the situation improve?  For sure, there are, as I mentioned, there are obstacles to labor market participation.  In our estimate, when refugees were allowed to work,   like either other migrants in the country,   or like Jordanians, the cost for hosting refugees would drop to about 500 million dollars.  Now, just think about it, right?  Imagine that we can use those savings that would be feasible   if refugees were allowed to work more or could work more,   and we could spend that money on the economic development of Jordan itself,   spend that money on creating more jobs,   or spend that money on some of the refugees that are extremely vulnerable,   and it could definitely benefit from a little bit more of assistance.  That brings me to my last slide,   which is where I think the whole issue of self-reliance has the potential of bringing a triple win,   which not coincidentally, is, of course, the title of the booklet that I was promoting.  There are three wins.  The first win is refugees gain agency, they gain financial autonomy, which is a good thing for them.  The second win is there will be less money needed for international assistance.  And finally, that frees up money that can be invested for other purposes,   like economic development or spending on the most vulnerable.  With that, Xavier, over to you. 

[Xavier Devictor] So many, many thanks, Karishma.  Many, many thanks, Olive, Aziz and Hans, for this framing of our conversation today.  I also would like to nod to our audience.  I was just told that there are over 1000 people who are watching this online.  We're very, very happy to engage with you in this important conversation.  We started the event by noting that there are more refugees, same level of AIDS;   and therefore, we need to find more effective ways to support refugees.  I think the evidence our colleagues have shown   is that one of these most effective ways is obviously   to try to strengthen refugees’ ability to work in the countries where they live.  But I think the presentation also showed something else,   which is that in many countries it would also require additional investment.  In many countries, it will actually require additional contributions and efforts.  I guess there's one more element, which is that,   as we know, there are also some political dimensions to this question.  That's a background for the conversation that we wanted to have now   with a panel of very distinguished colleagues, fans and counterparts.  And so, let me briefly introduce our panelists   before turning to each of them with some questions for the conversations.  Let me first introduce Daria, Daria Jamil, who is a Syrian refugee living in Lebanon,   and with the Chief Development Officer of Basmeh & Zeitooneh for Relief and Development,   a relief organization that supports refugees in Lebanon.  After Daria, we will hear, or we will,   from Veronica Waeni Nzioki, who is part of the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kenya to the UN   in Geneva, and very much involved in all the conversation around the Global Refugee Forum,   Global Compact on Refugees, and what it actually means in terms of party collection of the ground.  We also have with us Abdouraouf Gnon Konde,   who is a Regional Bureau Director for West and Central Africa at UNHCR, the UN refugee agency,   and also an old friend and colleague with whom we've worked very closely.  Jean-Christophe Carret, our Country Director for the Middle-East Department,   including Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Iran and Syria,   but also our former country director for DRC, Burundi,   and Angola would also join us from a World Bank perspective.  And then finally, we have with us Dominique Favre,   who is the representative at the World Bank Board of Executive Directors.  He's a representative of nine countries, including his own Switzerland.  Now, let me maybe start with a question to you, Daria.  You've just heard a series of presentations   about the inclusion of refugees in national systems in the labor market.  But how does this work in real life, from your experience, what does it all mean in practical terms?  What would make the biggest difference for refugees,   and what are the actual challenges that would have to be overcome   and the opportunities that could be taken advantage of?  Over to you, Daria.

[Daria Jamil] Hello.  Good morning.  Good evening to everyone, depending where you are.  Grateful to be part of this space.  Thank you for inviting me.  Maybe I want to focus on three aspects.  Maybe I would represent them as challenges,   but maybe we can, I will invite you to think about them,   how we can turn them into opportunities related to refugee inclusion.  So, the first aspect is the supportive environment.  I will break down this in a moment.  Perception.  Second is the perception about refugee mentalities   and the way of planning and working, and politicizing the refugee issues.  So, of course, I'm talking from the point of view of an organization   that works in the region on a Syria crisis.  So, maybe about the supportive environment.  Oftentimes what we have, we have the livelihood framework there.  Like the skills, the asset, the fund, the project, the land, the people, everything is there.  It looks like that we are very ready to execute this project or the program related to refugee inclusion.  However, what often time is missing in this region,   and it is crucial to refugee inclusion is the supportive environment,   meaning the legal framework and the community acceptance.  What I mean by legal framework is both legal residencies of refugees in the country and legal permits.  While in the region, refugee might find jobs.  But they are most likely, more often time informal jobs,   because there is no total or sufficient legal framework context   that might regulate and authorize them to work in the formal sector.  And if there is so, it will.  If there is a legal framework to support them, it will be limited to low skills jobs.  Hence, an environment, or I want to say opportunity,   like an environment would open to exploitation and abuse,   and at the same time, the host community would be angry.  Let me dissect that a little bit.  So, the refugees in informal employment are more vulnerable to exploitation, to abuse,   including long working hours, no protection, no payment sometimes, harassment,   and I'm sure, like everyone is aware about that.  And of course, they don't have access to legal services.  This is all another level of vulnerability that I won't go to.  Maybe it's related, simply they don't know where to access.  Maybe simply they don't have the fees of transport to access the services.  Maybe the legal services are not that effective, right?  So that would leave them to open to accept work employment   in a very low and unsafe, not decent conditions, right?  So we have people in distress now.  And on other hand, there is a social tension and it's created   because first we have very dangerous in the area, very dangerous anti-refugee rhetoric.  There is a lot of boxing of refugees, a lot of stereotyping, a lot of this leading up to discrimination.  On the other hand, parallel to the working condition,   there is the employment issue, where the employers would rehire refugees.  Lower wages, easier.  No legal headache.  However, the economically vulnerable host community that might enjoy some of their rights,   that they can access the legal framework, that can access legal services, they won't accept…  They are in a competition that they cannot face because they,   for example, if a refugee would accept, I don't know,   I will say whatever number now, like 0.5 dollar per hour,   a host community person won't accept that, right?  Their minimum wage, let's say 5 dollars hence,   as a result, the situation in the country would be very tense.  People are not getting their right.  At the same time, there are other people who cannot access a job because there is unfair competition.  Basically, this cheap labor is a double sword that’s creating vulnerability, exploitation and social tension.  So, what I'm trying to say here is that regulating and enforcing,   supporting the employment of refugees would allow access to this decent work,   and it's a must for inclusion.  Without it, whatever money we put, whatever skills we have,   this is broken, let's say system or a program. 

[Xavier Devictor] Okay.  Many, many thanks Daria.  And many thanks also for highlighting   not only the potential of refugees and the difficulties they face in the informal marketplace,   but also the impact this has on host communities and possibly   in some cases the competition it creates with some host community members.  Let me maybe turn to Veronica.  Veronica, as I think was mentioned by my colleagues earlier,   Kenya has been very generous in hosting refugees for several decades in a very open manner.  The country has long relied on account system,   but it has also recently launched a set of far-reaching reforms to move away from camps,   including most recently the Shirika plan.  I guess the question I have for you is against this backdrop, I mean,   you've heard once again, a phase of presentations.  What's your take on that?  What resonates most with you?  Where do you think some of these findings can be most useful   and where do you think they may need to be nuanced? 

[Veronica Waeni Nzioki] Thank you very much, Xavier, and a very good morning and good afternoon to you all.  First of all, I thank you for inviting Kenya to participate in this event.  Thank you for the presentations, I think it's Aziz, Olive and Hans for the presentations.  We take note of the aspects raised, including on Kenya.  On the question, your first question, I think I have some seven very quick points to make.  The first one is echoing the consensus from the 6th technical workshop   on measuring the impact of hosting, assisting and protecting refugees,   and also, as it was outlined in the presentation, the more income refugees earn,   then the higher the likelihood of less need for complementary assistance.  That resonates.  Second, as Kenya noted in the 6th technical workshop, economic inclusion,   however, does not happen in a vacuum.  It must happen within a conducive economic and development environment.  In that regard, it remains very crucial to match the call or the drive   towards our economic inclusion with a requisite or communitarian development support.  Third, and closely linked to the second point is that policy is not a panacea.  Policy is important, but unanchored on the right economic and development environment,   then it risks being only aspirational.  The greater emphasis, therefore, needs to be on creating environments   where economic activity can thrive for both, refugees and host communities.  And fourth, I come to Kenya's legal framework and approach on refugee hosting,   and allow me to note the following has also been noted by Olive a few minutes ago in her presentation.  Many refugees live in urban areas and receive support which also enables access to work opportunities.  And to this end, the Government of Kenya has passed a number of laws as follows.  The gazettement of the refugee identification documents under legal notice 143 of September 2023,   the gazettement of the refugee general regulations of first, February 2024,   and the legal notice number 34, and the consultative development of the Shirika Plan Zero Draft,   aimed at transforming the camps into integrated settlements,   which is also now undergoing internal consultations   and thereafter stakeholder consultations will be held as mandated by the Constitution of Kenya.  It is our commitment to transition from traditional camps to integrated settlements   under the Shirika Plan, and it is our resolve to empower refugees and host communities alike,   and this embodies the lessons that we have learned from protracted refugee hosting histories.  Now, on the fifth aspect, which is also very close to that,   is that Kenya has also improved infrastructure,   with Kakuma and Dadaab towns promoted to full municipality status,   which is facilitating rapid access to government services,   and this is for both refugees and Kenyan host communities.  We set to also develop and maintain a refugee database for planning purposes   to further socioeconomic inclusion, participation and contribution by the refugees.  The fifth point, still on the fifth,   which also relates to the need to ensure that economic models are fully in tune   with the reality and dynamics of humanitarian contexts, both,   in protracted as well as volatile and recurrent situations.  In that regard, it's important to also note that refugee numbers and flows are not static.  This is a crucial aspect, particularly in our region,   which regrettably has been very turbulent over the years.  Therefore, the design, the planning,   the interventions must all be alive to both development dynamics, but as well, humanitarian needs.  And sixth is a very important point for us, is that context, context, and context matters.  Economic, security, history, social and governance contexts all matter from country to country.  The drive for socioeconomic inclusion must be alive to all these different contexts,   differentiated contexts in that regard,   for instance, on governance, in the case of Kenya, where we have a developed system,   there are concerted efforts to ensure that every county government thrives   and all its inhabitants thrive in their counties, and that success is not only in the center, in Nairobi.  Seventh, and last on this,   is that sustainable approaches are those interventions   that deliver on the four objectives of the Global Compact on Refugees in totality,   although the sequencing may vary.  Therefore, for those who may not be pliable to that is to ease pressures on host countries,   to enhance refugee self-reliance, to expand access to third country solutions,   and very importantly, to support conditions in countries of origin and return for safety and dignity.  Thank you, Xavier. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Veronica, for also reminding us that there's no one size fits all,   and that, as you said, it's context, context,   but also for making the link to the broader development agenda,   which is really the context in which refugees can actually prosper together with host communities.  Let me maybe turn to Abdouraouf.  For the longest time, support to refugees was mainly framed in humanitarian terms,   but over the last few years, we've seen an important shift   toward the most comprehensive perspective that also includes some development consideration.  I mean, this was evident in the Global Compact on Refugees,   which was approved in 2018 and more recently at the Global Refugee Forum last December.  And so, Abdouraouf, could you tell us a little bit more about this shift   and how the points that were discussed earlier can actually contribute to the debate   and can actually contribute to advancing this more comprehensive perspective?

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Thanks a lot, Xavier.  I don't want to take the risk of putting up the camera   because I just landed in Mali this morning and the connection is a bit unstable.  Forgive me [for] not putting on the camera.

[Xavier Devictor] Very much appreciated. 

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Yeah, thanks for the question.  I think the shifts, I will say that, it's clearly an education   that reflects the evolving understanding of the complexities that surround a false displacement issue.  Maybe I will just try to bring it up to the region.  If you take [the] West and South Africa region, the region hosts, as of May,   more than 3.2 million refugees and asylum seekers and more than 8 million IDPs.  Because of course, we are talking about refugees and the Compact is more for refugees,   but it is true that sometimes things, solutions that we do for refugees can also benefit IDPs.  We have 8 million IDPs.  I used to say that the IDPs of today, may be refugees of tomorrow   if we fail to provide the right response to their needs.  So, the increasing security, or insecurity in the central Sahel,   the spillover to the coastal countries, the Sudanese crisis,   with thousands of new arrivals in charts every month, the region, I mean,   all these elements are the element that affect   or maybe mark the ongoing conflict and mass displacement   that necessitate a holistic approach that integrates long term development goals.  At the same time, having said that,   it's very important to recognize that [the] West and Central Africa region   is still a region that has a tradition of welcoming refugees   and implementing liberal policies that underscore the importance of inclusive frameworks.  These frameworks not only ensure refugees or IDP rights,   but also pave the way for the economic participation and integration,   which are crucial, as we have heard from the other participants for long term development.  But large forced displaced people in the region have freedom to move within the country of asylum,   the right to be gainfully employed, the right to access services and opportunities similar to their host.  We have many examples from Niger, Cote d'Ivoire   that demonstrate how supportive policies can facilitate the inclusion of forcibly displaced persons   into host communities, promoting social cohesion and economic stability.  But despite [the] favorable legal environment that I have just described,   the profile of refugees and possibly displaced people in the region is characterized by two main aspects.  They live in poor areas of the country of asylum.  This is the case if you take the Gulf of Guinea, the countries,   those areas where even the hosts are struggling, there is no development infrastructure.  So, these are areas where refugees are living, the same in Chad, in the eastern part of Chad.  The second element is that refugees are living in the region for more than 20 years, 20 years in average.  So, it is clear for us that a long-term displacement situation requires development-oriented solutions   to integrate refugees into local communities,   reducing their dependence on humanitarian aid and fostering.  Let me emphasize, Xavier, on the focus on inclusion.  Not only is it aligned with human rights’ principles,   but it also proves to be cost efficient, as we have heard from Hans.  Empowering refugees to become self-reliant   can lead to significant economic benefits for host countries,   as seen in the examples that we have heard about this morning of Chad and Niger.  In conclusion, the shift in UNHR approach to include development consideration   alongside humanitarian intervention is crucial   for effectively addressing the complex realities of forced displacement.  The integration of socioeconomic inclusion, strategic partnership,   supportive regulatory frameworks, and development funding   into our response strategy will definitely ensure   that refugees and host communities can achieve long term stability and self-reliance.  This is what is outlined in the Global Compact on Refugees.  I thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks Abdouraouf, and many, many thanks also   for reminding us that while we, for the longest time,   thought about refugees as a short-term temporary emergency,   actually most refugees spend extended periods of time in exile.  I think before the invasion of Ukraine, the average refugee had already spent 13 years in exile;   and therefore, responding to their predicament to emergency assistance   is a little bit like treating diabetes in the emergency room.  It's very expensive and it's not terribly effective   and that's why I think we're all here today to try and think   about better ways to support people over time and in a more sustainable manner.  Let me maybe turn to Jean-Christophe.  Jean-Christophe Carret, with our Country Director for the Middle East Department at the World Bank.  The World Bank Group has taken steps to supporting development programs   that improve lives of refugees and host communities.  You, yourself have had extensive experience on this matter,   both in your current position in the Middle East, but also in your earlier position in Central Africa.  And so, can you tell us maybe in practical terms,   how the Bank can actually contribute to the necessary shifts   in terms of the support to refugees and host communities   and how we could actually further support hosting government efforts,   which very often are very generous.  Thank you so much. 

[Jean-Christophe Carret] Thank you very much.  Xavier, can you hear me? 

[Xavier Devictor] Yes, we can. 

[Jean-Christophe Carret] Thank you very much, and good afternoon, and good morning, colleagues.  So quickly, in the Mashreq where I am now, we need to recognize that,   in particular, the Syrian refugee situation is protracted and as such,   is increasingly for the countries that are hosting refugees,   a development challenge, and not only a humanitarian one.  As an institution, the World Bank, we cannot remain [as a] bystander anymore.  This means that we have to promote an active engagement on forced displacement issue.  Three quick comments and two examples.  So, first, well, even if we want to help with the forced development issues,   we are not a humanitarian agency,   which means that we work across all sectors and we can not only focus on forced displacement,   but also we have a disadvantage.  We have also competing priorities.  Probably the most now famous one is climate change,   though sometimes there is convergence between climate change and refugees.  But we have also one big advantage, in my opinion, is that we have multiple entry points.  We can talk to the prime ministers in a country, to the ministry of finance,   and also to all the different line ministers,   not only the social sector, but also ministers for digital transformation   to make sure that refugees are not going to be excluded.  So, that's the first point.  Second point, we can tap into a series of instruments.  Even if we are called the “World Bank,”  we are not only about financing.  We can bring analytical capacities, as we have seen earlier on,   and make sure that discussion on refugees are based on evidence and not only on value.  We can bring different types of financing instruments and not only the typical projects.  I'll come back to it.  We can adapt our financing instrument to the global public good nature of the refugee crisis.  Last, but not least, we can participate in dialog to bring stakeholders together.  So, it's not only one instrument that we have at the Bank,   but we have several instruments, the most important ones being financing, knowledge, and also dialog.  Let me give you two concrete examples of what we are doing both in Jordan and in Lebanon.  In Jordan, we have used the concessional financing, called GCFF,   to incentivize the government to increase the work permits for refugees   in exchange of additional concessional financing.  To give some order of magnitude, the programs that have been financed by GCFF   over the last seven years have provided more than 350,000 work permits for refugees, free of charge,   to access the formal economy, skills development,   income opportunities in sectors such as agriculture and digital, I mentioned it,   and also to expand home based businesses, especially for women.  So, that's the kind of, that's how we can use our financing instrument   to help promote self-reliance, as mentioned by the different presenter.  The second thing we are doing, which in my opinion is as important as the financing,   is to really promote the knowledge and make sure that policy discussions are based on evidence.  It was presented by Hans for Jordan, but we have done the same work in Lebanon.  We have provided recently for both countries the cost of hosting refugees,   both the cost of basic needs and the cost of access to public services.  In Jordan, this work has been mainstreamed in government plan,   what they call the “Jordan Response Plan.”  It's very important that the World Bank reports are not only seen from offshore or outside,   but are mainstreamed into government program.  And in Lebanon, where we are slightly less advanced,   we have just presented the results of this cost of hosting refugees   to the diplomatic community, to the presidents of the council.  So, it was a very solemn session last week,   and next week we are going to do the same presentation at the parliament.  We are really trying, with our comparative advantage, knowledge,   to inform debate that is complicated in the context of Lebanon, to say the least.  Over. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Jean-Christophe.  Many thanks also for highlighting the Bank's commitment to support this agenda   and the complementarity between humanitarian development is not one or the other.  It's really one and the other working hand in hand to complement each other   and for the Bank being able to bring financing, medium term financing,   but also knowledge, as you mentioned, and of course, access.  So let me now turn to Dominique, who is part of the Governing Board of the World Bank,   representing nine countries, including your own, Switzerland.  your constituency has been a very strong advocate   for a stronger Bank engagement on forced displacement.  We've heard about the importance of refugees’ economic participation,   but we've also heard about the need to provide hosting countries with support.  As they make progress in this direction,   support to deal with some of the infrastructure needs, land productivity needs,   also support to meet the needs of host communities, and the social aspects that are linked to that.  And so, that brings us to this agenda of responsibility sharing,   which is really at the core of the Global Compact on Refugees.  Yet we all know that these days, budgets are tight.  We all know that politics are sometimes very polarized.  And so, the question is, what could the Bank do?  What could the broader development community do, from your perspective,   to try and help move forward towards stronger and harder responsibility sharing? 

[Dominique Favre] Thank you so much, Xavier, and thank you so very much for having me here.  I mean, it's fascinating, and I think that everything   that I've heard this morning will aliment our positions at the Board.  There are lots of good insights.  I would like to thank everyone for the commitment on this agenda, indeed, for our Chair.  This is a very important one.  We insist a lot in having a very active World Bank in the field,   and of course, a World Bank that is a partner and a supporter   of the implementation of the Global Compact on Refugees   that was mentioned by first Veronica and then Abdouraouf.  So, yes, you're right, Xavier, you're totally right.  With the increasing conflict, with the crises, with the global challenges,   there is a bit of scarcity of funds, actually.  And in these situations, there is also a kind of polarization of difficult challenges, like the one on refugees.  I think, and we have heard it this morning by all the [participants],   that it's even more important then, to see this challenge   not only as, let's say, difficulty, but also as an opportunity.  It has been highlighted by Daria and Johannes very, very strongly.  I would like to focus my intervention a bit in continuation   to what Jean-Christophe said on the aspect of partnership,   teaming up in the areas of humanitarian development and peace.  I think that we cannot see, of course, the problems of refugees from a purely humanitarian perspective.  You were alluding to it also, Xavier, with the 13 years we had recently,   the visit of the ICRC Director General,   who said that a protracted crisis or a crisis nowadays lasts, in principle, 26 years.  So, it's really something that you cannot just tackle now   with purely humanitarian approaches,   but you need to somehow combine the approaches with the development aspects.  This is actually what the World Bank does.  We have a kind of long-term perspective, and we need to bring this forward.  Protected crisis and forced displacement situations call for durable solutions,   and we need to use development instruments for that.  It was very interesting to hear the presentations from the colleagues, I think,   especially when talking about working jobs,   this is typically something where the development actors have to come in,   education for displaced children, and creating legal frameworks like mentioned by Daria.  This is very important for tackling a long-term perspective from the refugee issue.  You can take the cities as examples.  Someone did so.  I mean, I think in there you have urban development,   you have aspects of schooling, systems of housing, etcetera.  These are all issues that we can foster with our development programs from the World Bank.  Recently, we discussed the Rohingya, Bangladesh situation in the Board,   and we all insisted in the fact that this is not anymore just a humanitarian project.  I was recently in Jordan, where I could really see   what Johannes was mentioning in his presentation,   that the integration and the, let's say,   overarching consideration of the presence of the refugees helps   not only the refugees themselves, but actually also the host communities.  Partnerships, I was mentioning it,   I can take as an example the UNHCR, of course,   partnership on the IDA window for host communities and refugees.  By the way, this is being discussed today in Kathmandu,   where I must say that there we have a stellar example on how to work on a long term   and on a short-term perspective with partners who both bring in their expertise.  Jean-Christophe was mentioning issues like joint assessment, data analysis, evidence building.  This is typically what we do together with the UNHCR   in IDA countries when implementing the refugee window.  There is also a partnership that UNHCR has with IFC,   and there they work more with the private sector to see   how the private sector can contribute to create jobs,   to deliver basic services, or to support business friendly policies in refugee hosting areas.  Very interesting areas that we need to follow.  To conclude, maybe a thought, Xavier, and it would be interesting to hear you or others on that.  I wonder if we should not also learn here to anticipate more the question of refugees,   when we have CCDRs on climate change,   where we discuss the country partnership frameworks,   where we should know already factor in the potential challenges,   but also opportunities like was mentioned earlier in the development agendas of the different countries.  Thank you, Xavier. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Dominique, for this overview.  And maybe also, just as a quick reaction to your last point, since the year 2000,   which is 24 years ago, there have been 21 years during which Chad has received refugees.  And so, we are no longer talking about an unexpected crisis.  We're unfortunately talking about a chronic set of events.  The question is, should we have the same response as if it was an emergency crisis?  I guess the answer is in the question,   but how does this actually affect the way we even think about such refugee crisis?  Let me, however, turn to Daria because you've heard a number of presentations,   you highlighted earlier the importance of the overall supportive environment,   but also the question of perceptions, the question of mindsets.  And so, the question is, so what should we do?  I would be very interested in your advice, if you could just very, very briefly tell us,   what are the two or three things   that you think development actors or external actors should actually focus on   in a very targeted and focused manner? 

[Daria Jamil] Okay.  Thank you, Xavier.  Thank you, everyone, for the amazing interventions and ideas.  Okay.  I think, again, I will quickly highlight the legal framework.  So, I mean, after ten years of refugee,   and we are only allowed to work in only three low-skilled sectors, and everyone knows that.  However, it's like challenging to face.  Again, second thing,   acknowledging in an active way and turn it to work that refugees are not one homogenous group.  Refugees are full of talent, capacity, and we should capitalize on that,   or else this is really an expensive loss of opportunity.  I feel encouraging also policy dialog,   creating incentivized refugee inclusion programs with the government.  This is, I feel like something not to escape...  It should be supported when the governments were reluctant to   or don't have the means to encourage refugee economic inclusion.  I feel the big organization can be also support the local community,   a refugee led organization, in facing the dangerous rhetoric, the anti-refugee sentiment.  This should be, in my opinion, a real active campaign through social media, through whatever means,   to enhance social peace because if we have this kind of social peace,   refugees and host community can come together   and they will find together the solution for their own problems.  People are creative and resourceful, and refugees are people.  So, they need to have this space to come up with their solutions.  Also, maybe to revise the bias against refugee leadership.  And when I say bias, I mean where everyone is convinced that, for example, AREL,   or a refugee led organization is a dangerous organization to fund.  They don't know what to do.  They are small.  I mean, this mindset maybe should be revised a little bit,   maybe to look into the capacities of a locally refugee led organization.  Where they will be able definitely to bring change and the solution.  They need just the safe space to do that and a space to dialog and discussion.  Maybe also, and this is my last point, what the World Bank now is doing is bringing this evidence.  I feel this is very important, too.  It will support everyone, actually.  It will support us also as refugees to when we go to discussions and we do a lobbying,   we can also use this evidence, like the World bank has this evidence, it's not us, biased to ourselves.  No, there is a big organization that's bringing in documents, bringing in data and information.  I feel also and…  Not really my last one, opening space for this kind of discussion, maybe allow more time sometimes.  Maybe sometimes I would encourage also not necessarily structured discussions   to put people in the room and to let them discuss and create.  I feel that also might bring new, innovative solutions.  Thank you so much.  It was very inspiring listening to everyone in this event.  Thank you.

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, but the event is not over.  So let me now, let me thank you, Daria, for your appreciation of the knowledge work,   of the role of evidence and of, in a way, the Bank as a neutral knowledge provider,   which is very important in the policy dialog, especially in countries like Lebanon,   which objectively is facing extreme circumstances   with a very large share of refugees to its own population.  It's a case of its own.  But can I just, in a way, repeat some of the points that you've mentioned?  Just because I think they're so important for our audience today.  Refugees are people.  They're not victims.  They are not individuals that are just waiting for handouts.  They are people.  They can be creative, they can be part of the solution.  They just need a bit of space to do this, and they are not a homogeneous group.  And I think it brings us back to the point that Hans was making,   which is these people, like any people, much prefer self-reliance,   having the opportunity to find for themselves rather than to be in a position of a victim, to be assisted.  I think as we talk about refugees,   it's really important to highlight this important area that you made so eloquently that,   it is not a homogenous group, and these are people, who can create,   who can be part of the solution, just as anybody else.  So many, many thanks for highlighting this.  Let me turn briefly to Abdouraouf.  In a way, a variation of the same question of what should we do?  Because what we see is that across the world,   hosting countries are using very different policy frameworks.  We see there are countries that are very welcoming and inclusive.  I'm thinking about Colombia in Latin America, or Jordan, as we saw it in the Middle East,   but also even in your region, countries like Niger have had fairly inclusive policies for refugees,   and yet we see all the countries which are a little bit more on the fence, who are a little bit more reluctant.  So, the question is, from your perspective, what would it take, in a way,   for using the examples of good practices to try and encourage others to move in this direction? 

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Thanks a lot.  Xavier, can you hear me? 

[Xavier Devictor] Yes, we can. 

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Okay.  I mean, let me take the example of Chad.  Chad, you know, has, if you look at the set of policies in place to deal with refugee issues,   you will be impressed and you will realize that it's a country that's very welcoming.  Refugees, knowing that today Chad has probably 1.2 million refugees   for a total population of 17 million inhabitants.  This is not an easy thing that Chad is doing.  Chad has shown its generosity towards refugees coming not only from Sudan, actually,   because Chad is also home for refugees coming from Nigeria,   refugees from Cameroon, refugees from South Africa Republic.  But of course, we focus sometimes much more on the bigger chunk,   which is the 1.1 million Sudanese, knowing that since April last year,   Chad has received close to 600,000 refugees,   on top of the 400 [thousand] that were there since 2003.  And you are absolutely right.  I mean, do we want to wait for another 20 years   to start looking at how we can deal with these new effects in a different way?  Knowing that the set of policies are there, but they are still not giving any fruition yet, but what is missing?  I will say that it's the way that we can all work together   to demonstrate with some evidence, data,   evidence to the government of Chad that actually,   if refugees in Chad have the freedom of moving, of settling,   not necessarily in camps, if they have easy access to identity cards,   which is the case at the moment, I understand, in order to have access to public services,   if they can have access to land and secure that access,   all of this will actually make the life of those refugees much easier, much easier.  And they can also contribute because if you look at the studies that Hans has shown us, it is clear.  It is clear that the only way we can support those refugees   in a country like Chad is definitely to convince the authorities in Chad   that refugees can work and actually be agents of development in the communities that are hosting them.  Actually, maybe let me just finish on that.  When you look at the profile of the Sudanese refugees that we are receiving since last year,   you will be surprised to see that among them, you have doctors,   you have nurses, you have lawyers, you have all these capacities.  Daria is absolutely right when she was saying   that we need to recognize the capacities of the refugees   and see exactly with a bit of courage, with a bit of risk, sometimes it requires to take a good risk.  How can we use all this capacity in a way   that those individuals can be supported in order to continue to live a dignified life where they are hosted?  So, I think it's a bit of all of this, political dialog, data, evidence,   and continue to work together in a strong partnership   with entities like the World Bank in order to convince,   and then move forward the advocacy agenda with the authorities.  I thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Abdouraouf, for this thought.  I cannot help but notice how much this is consistent   with what we heard from Daria in terms of the importance of dialog and knowledge,   also with what Dominique emphasized in terms of partnership,   but mostly about the point that refugees can also help create solutions for themselves   if they are provided with some space.  And finally, your point about the fact that considering them   as a homogenous group is actually quite misleading and maybe somewhat counterproductive.  So let me maybe turn to Veronica once again, a variation of the same question of so what should we do?  And basically, to also seek your advice and your guidance on this,   because we've seen Kenya make huge efforts to try and transition   from camps to integrated settlement in places like Kakuma in Turkana or Dadaab   at the border with Somalia, but we've also seen in the presentations,   earlier presentation by our colleagues, that this will require some investment,   which I think you highlighted in your earlier intervention   in terms of infrastructure, in terms of support to host communities.  We've seen that these regions are among the poorest in Kenya.  And so, the question is, you know,   what support from the international community do you think would be most helpful in this context?

[Veronica Waeni Nzioki] Thank you again, Xavier.  I think on the forms of support in the international community   that Kenya would need to deliver on the reforms.  Very ambitious reforms.  [Spanish interpreter speaking] 

[Veronica Waeni Nzioki] Information technology sector, which is a very vibrant sector in Kenya,   and the renewable energy provision, food processing,   irrigation projects and metered water that is affordable,   and other social amenities and water, especially because up there,   of course, there's quite a number of water pressures,   establishment of market opportunities and facilities and wholesale malls,   and lastly, environmental management, of course, including waste management,   as well as reforestation efforts.  Third, is the establishment of municipalities   is a very heavy investment and endeavors you've mentioned, Xavier,   and in that regard, support will be crucial in all infrastructure associated   to and relevant to municipality status, including banks,   cyber security management, hospitality, industry and security provision.  Fourth, to enable further socio-economic inclusion,   we're working on addressing the remaining hurdles on financial inclusion,   and joining telecoms by refugees, and this is under progress   through the National treasury and the Communication Authority of Kenya for SIM card regulations,   review and recognition of refugee identity cards.  Kenya on that regard also continues to integrate   and include refugees international government service delivery systems.  Fifth is a need, and very recently, just came from 2023,   is a need to match the Global Refugee Forum pledges, particularly for the second Global Refugee Forum.  This is crucial because there we made quite a number of pledges,   both on the national level, but also multi-stakeholder pledges across vast areas,   including national pledges on the Shirika Plan for refugees and host communities, registration   and documentation, health, social protection,   planning and service provision, statelessness and education sectors.  And on the multi sector front, we also made pledges on climate action,   on economic inclusion, on education, health, sports, human settlements,   resettlement and complementary pathways, and very importantly, peace building and conflict resolution.  And so, we thank partners who've stepped up to match some of these pledges,   and we continue to urge more partners to join the matching efforts   in order to realize their implementation and realization.  We also thank the World Bank for the partnership so far.  Thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Veronica,   and many thanks for highlighting the need for investments in a broad range of areas,   but I couldn't help but note some of the words you use,   “private sector, market opportunities, new technologies.”  I couldn't help but think in how much of a shift this has been from looking at,   for all of us in the international community,   from looking at refugees as just recipients of our generosity of welfare,   to talking about them in the context of market opportunities,   private sector engagement, use of new technologies.  And so, that's, once again, I guess, an element of the shift that's needed.  Let me turn to, to Jean-Christophe, the last variation,   in a way, of the same question of what should we do?  Because we're seeing an increase in forced displacement,   both in terms of numbers, but also in terms of complexity.  And as you said, Jean-Christophe, for the World Bank,   this is one of many competing priorities, including issues like climate change,   but also, at the national level, a number of priorities for the country itself.  I guess the question is,   how do you see the Bank adapting the way it works to address these growing challenges?  And how is it part of, in a way, the broader transformation   of the World Bank that our new president, Ajay Banga, is spearheading? 

[Jean-Christophe Carret] That's a difficult question, Xavier, but let me bring forward maybe four points.  Two of them have been mentioned by Dominique, so I will mention them quickly.  First, the work on refugees and host communities   at the World Bank falls under the Bank Group’s FCV strategy.  So, the Group you belong to and you are working, as mentioned by Dominique,   on a new strategy that includes preventing conflict, staying engaged during crises,   and helping countries turning around from crises.  There are still new approaches, and the Bank is still adapting to some extent,   but I completely agree that if we want to stay, to be not a bystander,   as I was mentioning in my first intervention on the refugee issue,   we need to work also upstream on the broader crises’ resolution and even more importantly, prevention.  That's number one, we need to invest in understanding crises and how to respond to them.  Number two, Dominique mentioned it also.  It's very important that we continue to collaborate with humanitarian partners.  The triple win mentioned by Hans was a book that we prepared in collaboration with UNHCR,   and it was an extremely fruitful and productive collaboration.  And in Lebanon, where we did the cost of hosting refugees alone,   we worked upstream on the last welfare survey, again with UNHCR and WFP,   and we need this collaboration in order to stay engaged productively in these complicated issues.  So that's my two first point, the two others.  One is a little bit counterintuitive.  You are saying in your introduction for today’s event that financing for refugees is declining,   but to some extent, in the Mashreq, if you look at Jordan and Lebanon in particular,   as far as the World Bank is concerned, we are increasing our commitment over the years.  So, for example, today in Jordan, we are committing approximately 1.5 billion dollars per year,   and in Lebanon, we are working to commit half a billion dollars per year.  So, if you take the percentage of refugees in these two countries,   10% for Jordan and between 25% and 30% in Lebanon,   the World Bank to some extent is committing approximately for the two country 300 million dollars   that are benefiting directly refugees,   and in particular because we are investing in infrastructure   that are going to make possible bringing the public services,   such as electricity, water, and also the social services to the population.  So, we are participating in the investment part of the cost of supplying additional public services.  It's a relatively good news in the current context, that for various reasons,   the World Bank increasing in its engagement in development in both countries,   it's bringing more funds to the refugees.  My last point, probably the most important one, everybody mentioned it in their presentation,   and I’ve already mentioned it once,   economic participation of refugees is a game changer   when it comes to efficiency and sustainability of support to the refugee crisis.  The figures provided by Hans in his triple win report with his colleagues are really striking.  If refugees were not able to work in Jordan,   the cost of hosting refugees would be double to what it is now.  And if we were able to fully authorize the refugees’ participation in the labor market,   it will save another half a billion dollars.  So, these are really game changers, and I want to stop with that.  Thanks.

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks.  Jean-Christophe, by emphasizing your last point   about the game changing nature of economic participation in the current context,   but also the commitment of the Bank to continue supporting countries as they move in this direction.  Let me maybe ask Dominique a last question,   which is that when you look at the news,   it's fairly easy to be a little bit depressed thinking about forced displacement.  And yet, I know you as an inveterate optimist in the best meaning of the world.  And so, my question is, even in this challenging geopolitical environment,   what makes you hopeful about the situation? 

[Dominique Favre] Actually, I think if we can implement all the good ideas   that we heard now in this last round, we can be quite optimistic and positive.  In other words, I think today's meeting shows that we can,   by hosting refugees in a sustainable manner,   by working together, each one in his field, to have a good legal framework,   to have innovative solutions, etcetera,   we can maybe reach this triple win agenda that you were mentioning.  And when you say triple win, despite the geopolitical situation,   despite all the problems, this is indeed a step forward.  I think this recognition and this dissemination of experiences and of expertises,   and studies that you have done that aliment   and that underscore this aspect is extremely important and will definitely bring us further.  So, I'm quite positive after today's meeting.  Thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks, Dominique.  Can I give the same question in 20 seconds to each of our panelists?  Elements of hope.  How do you want our audience to keep thinking positively about the agenda?  Maybe I'll start with Jean-Christophe. 

[Jean-Christophe Carret] I have one line to respect your rule, Xavier.  I'm also the Director for Syria.  An evolution of the situation in Syria would also be a game changer.  Thanks. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many thanks.  Abdouraouf.  Are you muted?  Yeah. 

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Yes.  Can you hear me? 

[Xavier Devictor] It works. 

[Abdouraouf Gnon Konde] Yes, it works.  Okay.  I mean, element of hope.  I will say that, you know, despite the geopolitical divide that we have in the region,   we need, all of us, to stay the course.  We should not fail the people of this Sahel region, Sahel in a big sense.  So, for me, this is what I can put out as element of hope.  It's not easy, but we are doing the right thing.  And maybe I will just finish with three points.  Data, data, data, dialog, dialog, dialog, and development led solutions.  I thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many thanks.  Veronica.  What should make us hope? 

[Veronica Waeni Nzioki] I think I'll speak about human dignity, and I think that's something that binds all of us together.  And so, as we discuss statistics and numbers today,   it's very important to keep in mind that they represent the individuals   whose lives are affected by our policies, actions and commitments.  And together, we must work to create a world where refugees and host communities,   both, can build a future filled with dignity, prosperity and peace,   and where there's a promise to return home to opportunity, and to safety, and to dignity.  I thank you. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks.  And maybe last but not least, Daria. 

[Daria Jamil] Well, elements of hope.  People themselves and their capacity to organize themselves   and to create their own solution and how we see them,   even on a really small scale,   but they are able to create their network of support, a network of innovation,   and network of supporting each other to come up with adequate solution,   even if the situations are very hard and very extreme sometimes. 

[Xavier Devictor] Many, many thanks.  And with these last words,   let me close this event by thanking our audience for taking the time to engage on these issues,   but also that, by reminding all of us that these are people.  What we're talking about here is about people,   people living in extremely difficult circumstances   and about finding the best possible ways to support them.  So with this, let me thank you once again and close this event,   and maybe thank our panelists and our presenters.