Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

Transcription

1 EuropeAid Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip March 2009 Submitted by: I

2 Acknowledgements This report has been produced by EUNIDA, with France Cooperation Internationale as the leading implementing agency, for the EuropeAid Cooperation Office and has benefited from input and contributions from the Palestinian Authority and its ministries, especially the Ministry of Planning, relevant municipal and utility authorities and representatives of the EU Member States. Special thanks are due to the staff of UNDP based in the Gaza Strip for their assistance and support. The Team is grateful to the continuous support of ECTAO and the EC Occupied Palestinian Territory Desk, EuropeAid Cooperation Office, and in particular Virginia Villar Arribas for her time and dedication in the field supporting the mission. Disclaimer: This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of EUNIDA and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. The report was written by a team of eight experts supplied by EUNIDA (Crown Agents, FIIAPP, GTZ and FCI) comprising: Patrick Auffret (Team Leader), Wessam Almoamer, Isabel Camacho, Robert D Cruz, Mo een Rajab, Wa el Safi, Amal Tarazi and Paul Wolstenholme. Important support was provided by Ahmed Alfara, Amjad Jadara and Mohammed Mishmish.

3 List of Acronyms ACAD Arab Centre for Agricultural Development ACF Action against Hunger-Spain BDS Business Development Services CAP Consolidated Appeal Process CBOs Community based organizations CHF Cooperative Housing Foundation CMWU Coastal and Municipalities Water Utility EC European Commission ECTAO European Commission Technical Assistance Office EOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal EQA Environment Quality Authority ERW Explosive Remnants of War ESSP III Third Emergency Services Support Programme EU European Union EUNIDA European Network of Implementing Development Agencies FCI France Coopération Internationale FIDIC International Federation of Consulting Engineers GEDCO Gaza Electricity Distribution Company Limited GERRNA Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Needs Assessment GERRP Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Plan GIE Gaza Industrial Estate GoJ Government of Japan GTP Graduate Training Programme GTZ German Agency for Technical Cooperation Ha Hectare HCF Health Care Facilities IDF Israeli Defence Forces IMG International Management Group INGOs International NGOs JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency JRC Joint Research Centre JSP Job Support Programme KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (German government-owned development bank) MA AN MA AN Development centre MDLF Municipal Development and Lending Fund MoA Ministry of Agriculture MOEHE Ministry of Education and Higher Education MOH Ministry of Health MoLG Ministry of Local Government MoP Ministry of Planning MoPW&H Ministry of Public Works & Housing MW Mega watt

4 NGO OCHA PA PalTEL Group PARC PBA PCCG PENRA PFI PHG PIEDCO PITA PSCC PWA SMEs SW SWMC s TAM UAWC UNCT UNDP UN-HABITAT UNICEF UNMAS UNRWA UPVC USAID UXB UXO WB WFP WWTP Non-Governmental Organisation United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Palestinian Authority Palestinian Telecommunications Group Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees Palestinian Businessmen Association Palestinian Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture for Gaza Governorates Palestine Energy and Natural Resources Authority Palestinian Federation of Industries Palestinian Hydrology Group Palestinian Industrial Estate Development Company Palestinian IT Association Private Sector Coordination Council Palestinian Water Authority Small and Medium Enterprises Solid Waste Solid Waste Management Councils Technical Assessment Mission Union of Agricultural Work Committees United Nations Country Team United Nations Development Programme United Nations HABITAT United Nations Children s Fund United Nations Mine Action Service United Nation Relief and Works Agency Unplasticised Poly Vinyl Chloride United States Agency for International Development Unexploded Bomb Unexploded Ordnance World Bank World Food Programme Waste Water Treatment Plant

5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements... ii Acronyms... iii Table of Contents... v List of Tables... vii List of Figures... viii ExECuTivE SummAry...x i. introduction Background... 2 a. EU Palestinian Authority relations... 2 b. International response to the conflict... 3 c. EC response mechanism... 4 d. Socio-economic background methodology... 7 a. Phase 1: Data-collection methodology... 7 b. Phase 2: Damage assessment methodology... 7 c. Phase 3: Needs assessment and programme identification methodology... 9 ii. damage ASSESSmEnT damage analysis by sector a. Rubble removal and unexploded ordnance b. Public building c. Energy d. Water, wastewater and solid waste e. Transport f. Agriculture g. Private sector h. Telecommunications i. Housing Comparison with the estimates presented by the gerrp Socio-economic impact of damage impact on EC & Eu member States projects V

6 iii. identification of needs overview of the programmes Proposed implementation mechanism overview of the programmes by sector a. Rubble removal b. Public buildings c. Energy d. Water, wastewater and solid waste e. Transport f. Agriculture g. Private sector h. Programmes overview from the socio-economic perspective List of programmes impact of proposed programmes on the socio-economic conditions Conclusions Annex A : List of Contacts Annex B : Programme Fiches by Sector Annex C : Cd of Annexes List of Annexes VI Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

7 List of Tables Table (1): ECHO emergency support and global plan amounts (in )... 4 Table (2): Basic information of Gaza s demographics... 5 Table (3): Difference between EUNIDA estimated damage and GERRP reported damage Table (4): Estimated damage - Rubble removal and UXO clearance Table (5): Estimated damage Public buildings Table (6): Estimated damage Energy Table (7): Estimated damage Water, wastewater and solid waste Table (8): Estimated damage Transport Table (9): Estimated damage Agriculture Table (10): Estimated damage Private sector Table (11): Estimated damage Telecommunications Table (12): Estimated damage Housing Table (13): Damage costs of EC & EU Member States projects Table (14): Overview of identified programmes Table (15): Summary of identified programmes per sector Table (16): Average daily wage for labourer in Gaza VII

8 List of Figures Figure (1): Real GDP per capita (1999 & 2008)...6 Figure (2): Youth unemployment percentage (1999 & 2008)...6 Figure (3): Poverty rate (1999 & 2008)...6 Figure (4): Damage verification methodology...8 Figure (5): The percentage of estimated damage by sector...13 Figure (6): Location of damage - Rubble removal and UXO clearance...14 Figure (7): Destroyed house at East Jabalya...16 Figure (8): Rubble crushing and storage area near Khan Younis...16 Figure (9): Location of damage Public buildings...17 Figure (10): Skhneen low basic school for boys, Beit Hanoun, Gaza North...20 Figure (11): Location of damage Energy...21 Figure (12): Damaged transformer in GEDCO storage yard...23 Figure (13): Damaged GEDCO vehicle...24 Figure (14): Temporary repairs, Jabalya...24 Figure (15): Location of damage Water, wastewater and solid waste...25 Figure (16): Allocation of damage in Water, wastewater and solid waste sub sectors / Gaza Strip governorates (numbers in thousand )...27 Figure (17): Complete damage of Namar water well in Jabalya...29 Figure (18): Solid waste accumulation at entrance of Beit Hanoun...29 Figure (19): Location of damage Transport...30 Figure (20): Clearance of a damaged road, North Gaza (Courtesy of UNDP)...33 Figure (21): Location of damage Agriculture...34 Figure (22): East Jabalya - Livestock & poultry farms...37 Figure (23): Beit Lahia Horticulture significant damage...37 Figure (24): North Gaza Total damaged green houses...38 Figure (25): Location of damage Private sector...39 Figure (26): Allocation of private sector damage...41 VIII Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

9 Figure (27): Amount of industrial sub-sector damage in millions of...41 Figure (28): Decrease in monthly income per household from year 2000 till now...42 Figure (29): North eastern Gaza Abu Aida cement factory (Construction industry)...43 Figure (30): Eastern Gaza Taha Daloul and Brothers Company (Metal industry)...43 Figure (31): Location of damage Telecommunications...44 Figure (32): Destroyed JAWWAL 30m tower in East Gaza city...46 Figure (33): Destroyed PalTEL main switch in East Jabalya...46 Figure (34): Location of damage Housing...47 Figure (35): Totally destroyed house (6 housing units) in East Jabalya...50 Figure (36): Partially damaged house in Tahoun (2 housing units)...50 Figure (37): Socio-economic impact of damage household needs...55 Figure (38): Percentage of needs amounts per sector...62 Figure (39): Frame work of private sector programmes...67 Figure (40): Cost to create each man-day of work by Sector...74 IX

10 Executive Summary Background The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated territories in the world, with some 1.5 million Palestinians living in an area of 40km by 10km. More than 1 million are UN-registered refugees, with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) administering all refugee-related issues including housing, health and education, while the remaining half million are formally under the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Since June 2007 Hamas has controlled the Gaza Strip, resulting in Israel imposing even tighter restrictions on the access of people and goods into the territory, allowing only limited quantities of basic humanitarian supplies to enter. For this reason, the economic and social situation in the Gaza Strip was already extremely fragile before the Israeli attack that began on 27 December 2008 and lasted until 18 January According to UN sources 1, 1,440 Gazans have been killed and about 5,380 wounded while more than 100,000 have been displaced. The conflict has aggravated an already difficult socio-economic situation: the unemployment rate has climbed from 29.7% in December 2008 to an estimated 49.1% after the conflict. Healthcare facilities, already under pressure before, were severely affected during the conflict. Education was halted with 164 students and 12 teachers killed and 165 public school facilities seriously damaged. Over 90% of the population needs to receive food support from UN agencies. The lack of access to most basic services further worsened the daily life of the people in Gaza. Palestinian Authority and international response As a first response to the critical situation after the conflict, a rapid assessment of the most urgent humanitarian needs was provided under the Flash Appeal launched by the UN in February 2009, which estimated these costs at around $613 million ( 479 million). At the time of writing, $234 million has been funded, with more than $370 million still outstanding. In order to offer a strategy for mid-term intervention, the PA, together with UN Agencies, the European Commission, the World Bank, civil society and the private sector put together an Early Recovery and Reconstruction Plan for Gaza (GERRP) with an estimated cost of $2.8 billion ($1.3 billion for early recovery and reconstruction and $1.5 billion for budget support). This plan is in line with the Palestinian Reform and Development Plan (PRDP). It aims at consolidating donor responses to the Gaza crisis by providing a comprehensive plan and a series of preferred financial mechanisms for intervention. After the conflict the Joint Research Centre (JRC) completed a rapid damage assessment, which was released on 26 January, analysing pre- and post-conflict optical satellite imagery. ECHO committed 3 million as a first emergency humanitarian support, and is currently readapting half of this year s 52 million Global Plan, which will be directed towards Gaza. The EC also participated in the Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Needs Assessment (GERRNA, the basis of the GERRP) since its inception through the provision of experts and launched an EU-led mission through EUNIDA with the aim of contributing to the reconstruction process of the Gaza Strip by undertaking an assessment of the damage in key areas and by identifying programmes for possible funding by the EC, EU Members States and other donors. 1 "Humanitarian overview, Gaza Strip", OCHA, March 2009 X Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

11 The mission objectives The mission was tasked to: First of all, conduct a damage assessment in key sectors including: housing, public infrastructure, energy, water and sanitation, transport, public buildings and the private sector, including agriculture and telecommunications 2. Moreover, the mission was requested to assess the damage sustained by projects financed by EU Member States and the EC. Secondly, based on the above-mentioned assessment, identify the main needs for the population in Gaza and provide concrete proposals for action, which could be financed by the EC, EU Member States or other donors. Mission stages The mission was divided into 3 stages: (1) contact & data collection, (2) verification & evaluation of damage and (3) assessment of needs & identification of programmes. It was based in Gaza, with 3 days between the last two phases spent in Jerusalem. After initial meetings with EuropeAid in Brussels, the EC Technical Assistance Office (ECTAO), PA and other stakeholders in Jerusalem and Ramallah, the mission went to Gaza for 2 weeks to carry out the task of assessing the damage. On completion of this stage, the findings were presented to both ECTAO and the PA, prior to the mission returning to Gaza for 8 additional days. In this second stage, the mission identified programmes for EC and EU Member States funding. Finally, the mission spent the last 3 days in Jerusalem drafting the final report and presented initial findings to ECTAO and to EU Member States representatives in East Jerusalem. During the entire mission, the experts worked in close collaboration with PA ministries, public utilities, as well as with UN organisations (UNDP, UNRWA, FAO, and other relevant UN Agencies), private sector organisations, banking representatives and NGOs. Findings - damage assessment and verification Data on damage was collected from a variety of sources and key stakeholders, including the information already gathered through the GERRNA (Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Needs Assessment) initiated by UNDP and the PA, with the support of the EC, the World Bank as well as the private sector as civil society representatives. This assessment was the basis of the GERRP (Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Plan), which was presented by the PA in Sharm El Sheik on 2 March To verify GERRP damage estimates, consultations were made with key stakeholders. These were followed by field visits, analyses and comparisons of available information. Any differences between the GERRP and the mission estimates were then closely investigated. The following basic assumptions have been used in the verification of damage: The damage estimates included in this report are, as far as they can be isolated, only related to the most recent conflict which took place from 27 December 2008 until 18 January The estimation of reconstruction costs has been based on construction costs prior to the closure with recent inflation costs taken into account to develop a reasonable estimate agreed with PA and UNDP. As for agriculture, West Bank prices were used. 2 For the sake of clarity, agriculture and telecommunications have been analysed separately from the rest of the private sector subcomponents. XI

12 It is nevertheless important to note that the effect of the blockade imposed by Israel since June 2007 has been devastating for all sectors due to the lack of maintenance, spare parts and equipment. It caused a severe deterioration in all areas even prior to the latest conflict. For this reason, the needs identification and programme proposals take into account these needs in order to help the population regain minimum living standards. The total damage estimated by the mission for all sectors covered amounts to million ($659.3 million) compared to $891.8 million for the same sectors in the GERRP. The table below details the differences in each sector and provides some justification for them. Comparison with GERRP Sector Estimated damage million Estimated damage $us million (A) gerrp reported damage $us million (B) difference $us million (B-A) % increase Justification Rubble removal and UXO/UXB clearance % The UXO component is low and rubble removal is high but overall estimate is similar to the GERRP one Public buildings % The breakdown of sub-sector is not the same in GERRP and in this mission. Projects to enhance quality of health and education have been added in GERRP Energy % Water, waste water and solid waste % Transport % Agriculture % Private sector % Telecommunications % Housing % GERRP figures include rehabilitation of whole roads not only patch repairs of the concretely damaged parts as considered by this mission Assessment initiated by UNDP is not completed The GERRP includes some items which are not included in the mission estimate (i.e. Ministry of Agriculture losses or indirect costs) Slight differences occur in sub-sectors damage estimates. The assessment initiated by UNDP is not complete The GERRP estimates include some building development cost at the main switch. There is some double accounting The GERRP cost estimate for partial damage is based on a provisional lump sum of $10,000 per unit. Total $659.3 $891.8 $ % XII Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

13 Impact on EC and EU Member States Projects The total estimated cost of damage to EC and EU Member States projects relating to the recent conflict is million. From 2000 onwards, the total cost of damages to EC and EU Member States funded projects is estimated at million. The extent of damages reported by the EC and EU Member States was not as high as might have been expected bearing in mind the scale of the conflict, while the nature of the damage was consistent with the general damage trends observed throughout the Gaza Strip across all sectors. Projects most affected were agriculture, education and health facilities, roads, water and waste water, as well as additional damage to the Gaza International Airport. Specific needs of the population are in water, waste water and agriculture, to reduce health risks and to increase food security. The extent of the damage reported by the EC and EU Member States is not as high as it might have been expected bearing in mind the scale of the conflict. The main reason for this is that, due to the situation in Gaza, in particular the Israeli access restrictions, both the EC and Member States had kept infrastructure investment in Gaza at relatively low levels for a number of years prior to the latest incursion. Moreover, the estimation provided is based on information made available by EU Member States, which has not been systematically received. The consistency and level of detail received was highly variable, which made the verification of reported damage quite difficult. Therefore, the damage estimate might be underestimated and should be considered indicative. Findings programme identification In the second part of the mission, the experts developed key programme proposals for donor support funding. These programmes cover the damages sustained during the latest conflict but also address the most urgent needs resulting from previous conflict as well as from the blockade, which has been hampering the Gaza Strip and its population for several years. 3 Including the German figures provided after the end of the mission. XIII

14 Based on the damage assessment, the experts discussed the identified priorities with different stakeholders and came up with 41 programmes in 7 sectors. No programme has been proposed in housing as Arab states have provided preliminary indications that they might finance this sector. Also in telecommunications, no project has been proposed, as the concerned companies have not expressed any additional needs besides political support to get authorisation from Israel for access of their material. Programmes have been divided into two categories: Priority 1: Programmes expected to have a major socio-economic impact within six months of commencement. Priority 2: Programmes expected to have a major socio-economic impact only after six months from commencement. Sector Programmes Total ( ) Priority 1 ( ) Priority 2 ( ) gerrp ( ) Rubble removal Public buildings Energy Water, wastewater & solid waste Transport Agriculture Private sector ToTAL Programme estimates by sector General findings by sector include: Rubble removal Removal of the rubble is a critical initial activity that must be addressed as a high priority. Due to the high quantity of UXO and UXB items buried beneath the rubble, the act of rubble removal should be carried out simultaneously. XIV Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

15 Private sector Significant support is required to regenerate the economy and create sustainable jobs. A total of 7 projects were identified, each with different components involving financial and technical assistance, as well as reconstruction and institutional capacity building. Agriculture Redevelopment of this important sector is essential in order to improve food security and create both short and long-term employment. Infrastructure Extensive rehabilitation is required to restore these sectors to acceptable operating levels. In the Water, wastewater and solid waste sectors, a number of strategic upgrading programmes have been included, such as the expansion of solid waste landfill site (the current landfills are full and some health related issues are at stake). In the Energy sector, a number of strategic programmes have been proposed to reduce/eliminate the energy deficit and provide power to revitalise agricultural and industrial businesses. In the Transport sector, strategic programmes have been included to allow the regional and municipal networks to recover operational standards in order to stimulate trade. It is important to note that the implementation of these programmes can only be carried out if the necessary political agreements are in place to allow access through borders for materials and equipment. Proposed Implementation Mechanism As much as possible, programme will be implemented through PEGASE, the EU mechanism of support to the Palestinians. Considering the specific political situation, where it is not possible to work through the relevant PA Ministry or Agency or to implement it directly through PEGASE, it could be envisaged that for each programme a Project Implementation Unit (PIU) which will be responsible for the procurement and financial management of each programme be established. Depending on the sector, this PIU could be a UN agency, a private business, banks, NGO s or even a financially independent department of a utility. This PIU would work closely with the PA and relevant stakeholders to which it would report on a regular basis. Conclusions 1. Damage estimation: the total damage estimated by the mission for all sectors covered amounts to million ($659.3 million). 2. Damage by area: damage was mainly concentrated in the Governorates of North Gaza (37%), Gaza (27%) and Rafah (17%). 3. Damage by sector: the results of the EU-led mission show that the means of subsistence of Gazans were severely affected: 84% of the damage w inflicted on three key sectors: housing, agriculture and the private sector. These areas play a key role in food security, economic development and employment of the Palestinian population. Housing: 100,000 Palestinians were displaced, as a result of the damage to over 15,000 housing units, of which 4,036 were totally destroyed by the Israeli attack. 11,512 were partially destroyed. Damage in this sector has been concentrated in the Governorates of North Gaza (35%), Middle Gaza (21%) and Gaza City (19%). Agriculture: over 46% of the agricultural land has been damaged or became inaccessible as a result of the latest conflict. 16% (1,986Ha) of this land was severely damaged (including bulldozing of land, irrigation networks and demolition of green houses, crops, orchards and livestock shelters). Moreover, as Israel extended the Buffer Zone within the Gaza borders, an additional 30% of the agricultural land has XV

16 become inaccessible for farmers. The socio-economic impact of this in terms of employment and food security cannot be undermined: almost 30% of the agricultural workers lost their jobs (11,600); prices are on the rise while salaries are decreasing. Private sector: more than 700 commercial, industrial and service businesses sustained direct damage. 268 were totally damaged. The industrial sector was the most affected, in particular the areas of construction, food processing and metal. Already seriously affected by the blockade, since 2007, 90% business closed, laying off 94% workers in the private sector. This obviously has a direct impact also on the banking sector. The recovery of this sector is essential as it plays a vital role in the economic development of the Gaza strip, including employment and now also, reconstruction. The mission analysed other sectors which were also seriously affected. Public Buildings, Water, Wastewater & Solid Waste, Energy, Transport and Telecommunications are crucial for a complete and long term reconstruction of the social and economic system in Gaza. Public buildings: the latest conflict has brought about a further deterioration of basic services like education, health and security and consequently, a severe reduction in the quality of life of the population. Public services had been already functioning below acceptable standards prior to the conflict, due to the lack of resources and maintenance cause by the blockade. During the latest incursion, more than one third of all the public buildings were affected, including those providing education (245 kindergartens, schools, colleges, universities), health care (23 hospitals and clinics) and municipal (48 buildings) services. Half of the students were affected by the damage to education facilities and one third of the Gaza population suffered from the disruption of health services. Energy: the electricity distribution system in seven large areas of the Gaza Strip was targeted during the conflict. Supply was restored quickly through temporary works but these require permanent repairs to ensure safety and efficiency. Gas and fuel oil supplies were largely unaffected but remain subject to strict import controls. Transport: the road infrastructure in some northern municipalities (Jabalya, Izbet Abed Rabo and Al Montar) was heavily targeted during the conflict and requires extensive reconstruction. Other roads have suffered severely from a lack of maintenance during blockades. The ports were largely unaffected while the international airport was again targeted despite its closure in Water, wastewater and solid waste: the water and wastewater infrastructure has been heavily damaged in the latest conflict especially in the areas that witnessed ground military operations in North Gaza and Gaza City m³ of raw sewage and 45,000 of sewage are daily discharged to the sea, creating pollution and an increased risk to public health. About 25,000 tonnes of waste which was accumulated in some transfer stations is waiting to be transferred to the landfills. While damage to solid waste facilities has not been as high as for water and waste water, its impact in public health and environment remains significant. Around 1 million Gazans have been denied access to water and sewage services during conflict, and Gazans did not have access to solid waste collection services. Telecommunications: damage to telecommunications network was systematic, causing maximum disruption to both the local government and the community in general. Over 10,000 landline subscribers and 330,000 mobile subscribers were affected by the disruption of services. 4. Damage to EC and EU projects: The extent of such damage is limited ( 12.35M in the latest conflict) in relation to the total damage during this conflict due to the situation in Gaza and in particular the Israeli access restrictions, which led the EC and EU Member States to keep small infrastructure investment in Gaza at low levels during the last years. The recent conflict aggravated an already severe socio-economic crisis. 5. Since the takeover of Hamas in June and the consequent Israeli tightening of restrictions of access of people and goods, all sectors in the Gaza strip had been seriously weakened. Half of the active population is unemployed; 80% is dependant on aid; 90% of businesses have closed; public health needs and risks increased while health services decreased as the facilities were damaged and in lack of supplies. Gaza is facing a major environmental crisis due to the severe deterioration of water and sanitation services, disruption of XVI Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

17 electricity and the need for rubble removal. The lack of access to basic services further worsened the daily life of Gazans and the population has lost a large degree of confidence in the future. The blockade continues today, impeding economic recovery or reconstruction and denying the population the needed access to basic services and acceptable living standards. Access is a precondition for any recovery activity in the Gaza Strip. 6. While the assessment of damage focused only at the damage resulting from the latest conflict, the identification of needs covers the most urgent requirements resulting also from the access restrictions and the consequent deterioration of the sectors. The experts proposed 41 programmes in 7 sectors for a total amount of million. It is recommended that priority is given as follows: a) Short term: - Rubble removal is a priority as reconstruction cannot start if the rubble is not cleared. This operation should take place together with the clearance of UXOs, for the sake of safety. - Private sector as it is the key to economic recovery and job creation; - Agriculture to reduce the risk of food insecurity; - Water, wastewater, and solid waste as there are a number of critical health related issues and a looming environmental crisis. - Housing is one the basic needs of the population, although Arab States have shown interest in financing this sector entirely. b) Medium term: - Public buildings, particularly schools, health care facilities, and buildings providing social services. c) For the longer term, infrastructure rehabilitation will be essential for economic development: - Energy, as there is no economic recovery without access to energy, for both the population and the private sector; - Roads, to increase access to social services and improve movement of persons and goods. Programme implementation: 7. As much as possible, programmes will be implemented through PEGASE, either directly, or in cooperation with international organisations or other institutions. XVII

18 Gaza, General Map XVIII Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip

19 EuropeAid I. Introduction

20 1. Background EUNIDA, with the support of the European Commission, carried out a mission in Gaza, to contribute to the future reconstruction of Gaza by undertaking a damage assessment in co-operation with the Palestinian Authority (PA). The mission also liaised with other international organisations present in the area, in particular UN organisations and the World Bank. The mission comprised 8 experts, including 4 Palestinian nationals and was deployed in Gaza on 18 February It was scheduled to last 30 days and was organized into 2 phases. During the first phase, the experts carried out an assessment of damages in several key areas. In phase 2, the mission identified areas where EC and EU Member States assistance could most effectively contribute to the reconstruction process of the territory. The experts, working closely with the European Commission Technical Assistance Office (ECTAO), the PA and the donor community, identified projects for donor support, using so far as possible, existing mechanisms, and in particular, PEGASE the EU mechanism for support to the Palestinians. The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated territories in the world, with some 1.5 million Palestinians living in an area 40km by 10km. More than 1 million people are UN-registered refugees, with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) administering all refugee-related issues including housing, health and education, while the remaining are formally under the responsibility of PA. Since June 2007, Hamas has been in control of the territory, resulting in Israel imposing even tighter restrictions on the access of people and goods into Gaza, allowing only the most basic humanitarian supplies to enter. For this reason, the economic and social situation in the Gaza Strip was already extremely fragile prior to the Israeli attack that began on 27 December 2008 and lasted until 18 January According to UN sources 4 1,440 Gazans have been killed and 5,380 wounded while more than 100,000 have been displaced. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), the conflict has aggravated an already severe socio-economic crisis: unemployment rate has climbed from 29.7% in December 2008 to over 49% after the conflict. Health care facilities, which were already over-stretched prior to the conflict, were severely affected. Education was halted with 164 students and 12 teachers killed and several schools seriously damaged. The lack of access to basic services worsened further the daily life of the people in Gaza. a. EU Palestinian Authority relations The EU is strongly committed to supporting the Palestinian Authority s reform and development priorities and has been working with it to build up the institutions of a viable democratic and contiguous, sovereign Palestinian State, founded on peace and prosperity and living side by side in peace with Israel and its neighbours. The EU strives to create the conditions for developing a relationship that goes beyond assistance and co-operation, but also involves elements of economic integration and political cooperation. Dialogue with representatives of the Palestinian population has been based on the principles of the renunciation of violence, the recognition of the State of Israel and the respect for agreements previously signed between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation. The legal basis of the EU Palestinian relations is the Interim Association Agreement on Trade and Cooperation and the Action Plan of 2005 which established the agenda for economic and political co-operation with the EU. The Interim Association Agreement was signed with the PLO in 1997, but since the outbreak of the second Intifada in 2000, its implementation has proved to be difficult. European Community assistance to the Palestinians began in 1971, when the first contribution was made to the regular budget of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The EC is the biggest donor of financial assistance to the Palestinian people. EU humanitarian assistance, support to refugees and development assistance has been essential for the Palestinian Authority to provide basic public services in times of crisis. Since February 2008, Community support has been channelled through PEGASE, which replaced the previous Temporary International Mechanism (TIM). 4 "Humanitarian overview, Gaza Strip", OCHA, March Final Report Damage Assessment and Needs Identification in the Gaza Strip