No result found
Search For Common Ground;
The case studies in this book were prepared by members of Search for Common Ground's Middle East Chemical Risks Consortium (CRC)-- a group of Egyptian, Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian research centers that agreed to reach across political lines and cooperate to address the problem of chemical risks.
Each research center partcipating in the CRC chose a recent case of a local accident involving toxic chemicals. The cases highlight legal, technical, operational, and human factors contributing to the accident and draw lessons applicable in any country. Unlike the notorious 1984 Bhopal chemical factory accident in India, these incidents received relatively little media coverage and almost no publicly available analysis.
World Food Programme (WFP);
This CaseStudy reports that over the years, many aspects of cash and voucher transfers have been analysed and studied, however, there has not been a substantive amount of study specifically devoted to protection and gender implications - both positive and negative - of such programming. In response, in October and November 2011, WFP conducted a literature review of previous studies of cash and voucher transfers to investigate whether cash and voucher transfers were working towards improving protection of, or at minimum doing no further harm to, beneficiaries, as well as what impacts they could have on gender and community dynamics. In addition, WFP headquarters sent a short questionnaire to their field offices to gather their observations on the impacts of cash and voucher transfers on protection and gender within their own programming.
Pew Global Attitudes Project;
Focuses on the reaction to the war in Iraq, attitudes around the world towards the war on terrorism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iran, Syria, and North Korea, and views on American unilateralism.
This is the first-ever impact report of CARE's water+ program, which currently comprises more than 180 projects in over 40 countries. The study is a meta-analysis of 51 project evaluations, each scored against the three domains of the water+ theory of change: secure and sustainable access to services; gender-sensitive policies, institutions and norms; and gender-equitable control over services. Ten projects are also presented as case studies. The report concludes that there is a need to re-assess programming approaches and make more deliberate efforts to use water+ programs to orchestrate broader change.
Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC);
This publication shares and analyses people's sense of threats and safety through the lens of human security. Spanning six regions of the world, it presents the accounts of people living in Afghanistan, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Zimbabwe, Ukraine, Mexico, and the Philippines. As a people-centred approach to understanding threats to people's livelihoods, safety and dignity, human security is useful as both an analytical tool and an operational approach for addressing socio-political problems.
Rockefeller Archive Center;
Significant hope was vested in the League of Nations (LON) when it was established after World War I. As declared during its first council meeting held in Geneva, Switzerland, in January 1920, "humanity at large looks towards the League for the solution of the tremendous problems arising out of the War." Stemming from this was the mandate system, which was enshrined in Article 22 of the Covenant of the LON. The mandate system was intended to be a deviation from prior colonial practices. In contrast to colonialism, during which there was no formalized international supervisory power over the colonizers, various powers were delegated to oversee the administration of the territories of the former Ottoman, and German powers. The territories which belonged to the vanquished powers would be placed "in trust" under the administration of various mandatory powers. The mandatory powers had to adhere to the principles in Article 22. Additionally, the LON was supposed to supervise the various powers designated to ensure that the territories 'unable to stand by themselves' were duly guided towards self-government. Three categories of mandates were prescribed. The "A" mandated territories were deemed to the closest to the attainment of self-government, in contrast to the "B" and "C" mandates that were deemed to be further remote from civilization. Regarding the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain was allotted an "A" mandate over Palestine and Iraq; France was similarly given a mandate over Syria and Lebanon. These territories were deemed incapable of governing themselves by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and were thus placed under the administration of more capable powers with the objective of leading them towards eventual self-government.