SAMPLE Interview Questions for Humanitarian Agencies on the topic of Cooking Fuel Needs, Programs & Concerns

Background/policy

Discuss details of the agencys involvement in fuel/firewood issue: When did the programme begin?; Where (i.e.: other camps/regions beyond the current one? In one camp or multiple camps? In non-camp-settings?); o What is/was the scale (i.e.: was there a pilot programme, for example?); o Is this the agencys first involvement in this type of programme, or is it a follow on from something else? (and if so, what?)

o o

What prompted the beginning of the programme? (i.e.: request/encouragement from UN or other donor; agencys own findings, need to reduce firewood consumption, etc., combination of the above)?

What does the agency see as the primary motivation(s) for the programme protection, environment, health, reducing conflict with local communities, economic incentive/livelihoods, etc.?

o Particularly if physical protection is a primary motivation for the

programme, please explain the overall protection situation in the camp(s)/village(s). o Where do the majority of gender-based violence (GBV) or other protection incidents occur? o Who have been identified as the key perpetrators? (for example, local communities, security forces, fellow refugees/internally displaced persons (IDPs), etc.) o How, specifically, is the particular programme/device that your agency has introduced expected to reduce incidents of GBV? (i.e.: by providing physical protection, by securing the environment in and around the camp, by reducing need to collect firewood, by reducing tensions that may lead to GBV, etc.) also taking other potential benefits (environmental, economic, etc.) into consideration? If so, how? within the beneficiary population (for example, how is rape dealt with, if at all? Is domestic violence a problem? Do women survivors of violence have access to health services and/or any type of community or other support?)

o If protection is a primary motivation for the programme, is your agency

o Please provide a brief explanation of gender relationships/dynamics

This document was produced by the Womens Refugee Commission and accompanies the outputs of the IASC Task Force on Safe Access to Firewood and alternative Energy in Humanitarian Settings (IASC Task Force SAFE). Additional information is available at www.fuelnetwork.org. For questions or to provide feedback on this document, please email iasc@fuelnetwork.org

o What is the legal environment like for women survivors of violence in the
host country/region, and particularly for displaced women? To what extent are existing laws and policies followed in practice? Is your or a partner agency working with local, regional or national officials to address any gaps, etc. in existing laws?

o If environmental protection is a primary motivation for the

programme, has your agency addressed the programs potential in other areas as well (most specifically, protection of women, girls and vulnerable populations?) In other words, is the agency looking beyond the most immediate goals of the program to its other potential benefits?

Why was this particular type of programme chosen over other possibilities? (for example, why promote fuel-efficient stoves rather than solar cookers?) Is the programme explicitly tied by your agency or a partner to other types of initiatives, such as route patrolling or livelihoods activities, for example? Who is/are your key donors? What has your experience been in working with this/these donors? Have they been engaged in designing the project? Is your involvement in the project due to request from donors, or did you solicit funds specifically for this project? Operational: device/program details

Explain the type of programme/device being used or tested. Why was this particular activity/model chosen for the current location? Were other possibilities considered and/or tried? If so (and theyve been stopped), why were they not continued?

How is the device being produced? For example: Brought in from outside production source [local/regional or otherwise?]; o Produced by the displaced communities themselves [women? Men? Vulnerable groups? how are the producers identified, and by whom?]; o If the displaced communities produce the device, are trainings conducted? Who is conducting the trainings? o How long are the trainings? Are they part of a larger training program (literacy, health, etc.)?

What materials are being used? (in other words, are the materials available locally or must they be brought in?) If theyre brought in, how would you describe the ease of transport/distribution?

Is there any type of monetary or other economic incentive associated with production of the device or management and continuation of the
This document was produced by the Womens Refugee Commission and accompanies the outputs of the IASC Task Force on Safe Access to Firewood and alternative Energy in Humanitarian Settings (IASC Task Force SAFE). Additional information is available at www.fuelnetwork.org. For questions or to provide feedback on this document, please email iasc@fuelnetwork.org

programme? (for example, cash or food for work, fuel/firewood for work, etc.)

Is the local/host community engaged in any manner with the device/programme? o If so, how? What are the benefits or drawbacks of this engagement, both economically and socially?

Has the device/programme affected relationships between the displaced and local/host communities? If so, how would you describe the change? (for example, has it reduced or increased tensions? Between which groups? Is there any indication that the introduction of the device/programme has shifted tensions from one area to another?)

What is the anticipated medium and long-term impact of the device/programme? (for example, for how long is it sustainable in the camp/village environment? Can it be transported and/or re-introduced in communities of return?)

If it can be used after return, are there any programmes in place to link this usage/introduction with livelihoods programmes? If the fuel-related device can be used after return, and there are not yet programmatic linkages with livelihoods, are there plans underway to do so? If not, why not? (i.e.: there are a lack of livelihoods partners; host government regulations, etc.?) Would your agency be involved in this type of activity, or would you need to hand off to another? What do you see as the benefits and drawbacks of a programme that would link livelihoods programming with fuel-related initiatives, including those that can be used/produced after return? Operational: findings and monitoring/evaluation

Have there been any systematic tests of fuel efficiency and/or firewood savings for this device in the current location? What are the results? If used in combination with other methods, have there been any estimates of total firewood savings?

Is the protection impact of the use of the device being measured (whether or not protection was a key original goal of the program)? If so, how (i.e.: systematic reporting, anecdotal evidence, etc.)? Has there been a noticeable protection impact since introduction of the device? o If not, why not? (not enough time has passed to understand trends, for example). o Do you believe the introduction of the device/programme actually reduced incidents of GBV or other protection concerns outside camps?

o o

This document was produced by the Womens Refugee Commission and accompanies the outputs of the IASC Task Force on Safe Access to Firewood and alternative Energy in Humanitarian Settings (IASC Task Force SAFE). Additional information is available at www.fuelnetwork.org. For questions or to provide feedback on this document, please email iasc@fuelnetwork.org

o Have you noticed a concomitant increase in incidents of GBV in other locations?

Is the environmental impact of the use of the device being measured? If so, how? [and adapt follow-up questions as above] What do you see as the benefits of this model in this particular displacement situation/environment? What do you see as the drawbacks? What is the cost of the programme? Who is funding it, and for how long? If funding for the programme is time limited, what does your agency intend to do once the funding runs out? o Is there a strategy in place to promote any kind of market incentives, etc., to allow the programme to continue once it is no longer subsidised? o

What are your procedures for monitoring and evaluation?

Opinions Do you see your particular project as working to achieve it objective(s) in a self-contained manner, or as part of a bigger picture? If part of a bigger picture, what is that bigger picture? If, for example, it turned out that a programme/device instituted with the primary goal of improving the protection situation turned out to not have as strong an impact on the protection situation as originally envisaged, but was proven to have beneficial impacts in other areas (livelihoods, health, environmental protection, etc.), do you think your agency would continue the project? Why or why not, and under what circumstances? (in terms of cost, time frame, partners, your agencys comparative advantage/experience, etc.) What about vice versa? (that is, a programme instituted primarily for environmental protection turned out to have stronger physical protection implications)

This document was produced by the Womens Refugee Commission and accompanies the outputs of the IASC Task Force on Safe Access to Firewood and alternative Energy in Humanitarian Settings (IASC Task Force SAFE). Additional information is available at www.fuelnetwork.org. For questions or to provide feedback on this document, please email iasc@fuelnetwork.org