Promoting a Protective Environment for Children Affected by Disaster and War

Abstract

Creating a protective environment is the basis of the United Nations’ strategy for protecting the human rights of children faced with the extreme environmental threats posed by disasters and war. The “Protective Environment Framework” was developed as a basis to identify the key areas, where actions can be taken to increase the protection available to children (Landgren, 2005). It is a basis for thinking with appropriate breadth of potential influences on children’s well-being, but with sufficient focus to frame clear actions that will promote protection. There are eight identified features of the “protective environment” which together can be seen to form a potential protective “shield” around children – not eliminating risks and vulnerabilities, but creating protection from their full impact. These include: government commitment and capacity; legislation and enforcement; culture and customs; open discussion; children’s life skills, knowledge, and participation; capacity of families and communities; essential services; and monitoring, reporting, and oversight. We believe that all these features can be strengthened, and changes measured, through targeted support of international and national actors.

Appendix: Protective Environment Indicator Checklist

The above discussion suggests that the structure of the Protective Environment can be useful for the assessment and planning purposes in emergency settings. This section suggests a Protective Environment Indicator Checklist as a practical tool to track progress within and across emergency settings. For each element of the Protective Environment Framework, this checklist suggests key indicators, for each of which appropriate prompt questions are provided.

PROTECTIVE ENVIRONMENT INDICATOR CHECKLIST (Draft)

1.Monitoring and Reporting •GOVERNMENT CAPACITY: What is the capacity of government or other duty bearers in data collection? •AGENCY COORDINATION: What coordination mechanisms exist for interagency data collection on key child protection concerns? •CHANGES AND TRENDS: Is the child protection monitoring and reporting system capable of capturing short-term changes and long-term trends? •BREADTH AND SCOPE: Does the existing data collection system extend beyond monitoring child soldiers and other war crimes?

2.Governmental Commitment to fulfilling protection rights •CONVENTION COMMITMENTS: What key governmental commitments are reflected through being signatory of conventions? •CRC IMPLEMENTATION: What steps has government taken to implement actions consistent with the CRC?

3.Protective legislation and enforcement •NORMS: Do formal and informal justice systems abide by key international and national child protection norms? •SYSTEM CAPACITY: Do they have sufficient capacity to implement child protection safeguards and procedures? •DETENTION: Are children being detained in prisons with adults? Are they being detained by the military? Do lawyers and ombudsmen have regular access to both? •WELFARE: Are welfare mechanisms extended to a wider group of children who live on the margins of society, including juvenile delinquents, street children, and abandoned babies? Or is the focus only on police force, institutional care, and confinement? •LEGAL DEFINITIONS: Is the definition of a child in all legal (formal and informal) instances defined as any individual under age eighteen? If not, how is it defined, and how does this definition impact boys and girls differently? •DOCUMENTATION: Are key age and rights safeguards – birth registration and documentation – in place? Has this essential documentation been lost or stolen from refugees or internationally displaced? If so, how might it be replaced or substituted?

4.Attitudes, traditions, customs, behavior, and practices •EXPECTATIONS: What are the expectations made of children, and the features of community life that may be considered protective (or harmful) of them? •DISRUPTION: How has the emergency disrupted the capacity of families and communities to fully utilize the full range of intricate social mechanisms that have previously been used to maintain cohesion within and between villages? •HOSTILE FEATURES: What are the features of community life that appear profoundly hostile to the welfare of children, including the commoditization of children as a source of labor, and the control of girls (and their sexuality) through marked gender disparity? •TRADITIONAL HARMS: What traditional practices (e.g., FGM) exist that represent a significant protection risk?

5.Open discussion and engagement with child protection issues •SAFE REPORTING: What procedures and systems are required to ensure the security of children and adults who report protection concerns? •ANALYSIS OF THREATS: Have communities been consulted regarding the nature and timing of the threats they confront; the mindset and habits of those who threaten them; resources within the community; history of previous threats and co** mechanisms; practical possibilities for resisting threats; and optimal linkage between community and agency responses? •LOCAL DEFINITIONS: Do we understand local definitions of child protection and well-being? •WELFARE APPROACH: Have authorities begun to discuss and analyze social phenomenon, such as street children, from a protection perspective? Or do they limit discussion to economics and security? •OPEN TO SENSITIVE ISSUES: Are they open to the issue of rape and children associated with fighting groups? Or are they silent because of the implications of acknowledging such concerns? •IMPUNITY: Have authorities signaled a willingness to hold their own police or soldiers accountable for child rights violations? Or do they deny their involvement in such incidents? •MEDIA COVERAGE: Is media coverage reflective of key child protection concerns? Or is it overly focused on fundraising concerns?

6.Children’s life skills, knowledge, and participation •SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT: Are core protective factors – adequate teacher–student ratios; absence of humiliation, bullying, and corporal punishment; and safeguards against sexual abuse and exploitation – in place or achievable? •SCHOOL ENROLLMENT: Have key obstacles to children accessing schools – history of enrollment previous to emergency, short-term economic survival needs; safety and distance to schools; presence or absence of funding for emergency education; and fees levied by teachers and/or school committees – been assessed? •VULNERABLE ACCESS: Are plans in place to ensure vulnerable children – female-headed households; households where grandparents or older siblings are the primary caregivers; and teenage females with babies of their own – are able to attend school? •PARTICIPATION PROMOTED: Has staff capable of promoting the self confidence and active participation of children been identified to organize safe space programs, youth groups, and other informal education activities? •POLITICAL MANIPULATION: Is youth vulnerability to political manipulation being monitored?

7.The capacity to protect among those around children •EMOTIONAL SUPPORT: Are parents and families too overburdened with survival concerns to provide adequate emotional support? •STRAIN ON CAREGIVERS: Are mothers and other primary caretakers assuming work roles that involve longer separations as caregivers from their children than is normal? •LIVELIHOOD IMPACTS: How has the crisis affected traditional household livelihood strategies, including food collection, seasonal migration, and raising livestock? •TEACHER SUPPORT: Have teachers or their roles changed? Does corporal punishment, indoctrination, or recruitment in schools exist? •RELIGIOUS SUPPORT: How have the roles of traditional and religious leaders and their commitments to child protection changed? •HUMANITARIAN ACCESS: How can international actors’ commitment to child protection enhanced? How can humanitarian protection be extended to remote and marginalized populations?

8.Services for recovery and reintegration •KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE: Are knowledgeable child protection people in place and is good practice widely disseminated? •COVERAGE: Are recovery and reintegration services coordinated and extended to remote geographical areas and neglected groups of vulnerable children? •LINKAGE: Is there linkage of emergency response services to community and national child welfare and protection systems?