INFRASTRUCTURE AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming at the Green Climate Fund “In light of increasingly unpredictable and extreme climate- change induced weather patterns, infrastructure has a large potential to help defuse or protect communities from economic, environmental and societal crises that can lead to instability.”* Summary: Infrastructure projects in fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCS) are susceptible to many operational challenges, which might inadvertently escalate existing socio-economic and political tensions. Infrastructure, being intricately connected to the daily lives and societal needs of communities, often becomes a flashpoint in conflicts. Essential systems like water, energy, and transportation are not just physical assets; they represent broader social, economic, and political structures that can be either symbols of progress or points of contention. When these vital infrastructures are disrupted or commandeered, it can magnify existing societal disparities, restrict access to essential services, and further entrench divisions. However, with thoughtful planning and sensitivity to the local context, these projects can promote peace, address inequalities, and enhance social cohesion. Success in such endeavors often hinges on navigating uncertain political landscapes, adapting to evolving regulatory frameworks, and understanding regional complexities. 1. How Fragility, Conflict and conflicts. In conflict contexts, vital infrastructure and the built environment for Violence Relate to Infrastructure human activities can be destroyed or and Built Environment damaged, impacting important environments In FCS, the infrastructure and built specifically made to meet human necessities environment can play a critical role in both the in the vast sectors of education, health, eruption, escalation, and resolution of telecommunications, water, energy, and Page 1 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment agriculture. Infrastructure and the built capable of both cementing community environment represent a link of physical cleavages and favoring intergroup interactions spaces to their social implications; disruptions and social cohesion. They hold the potential to to critical infrastructure such as public services significantly enhance peace by establishing and community buildings can significantly vital infrastructure systems, such as housing, impact socioeconomic factors, perpetuating, education, and health facilities, addressing reinforcing, or reproducing inequality by structural socioeconomic disparities by limiting access to important resources and providing universal access, minimizing the impeding development opportunities.1 likelihood of uprising and violence, and by promoting sustainable development.5 Conflict parties, especially non-state armed groups (NSAGs), often seek significant influence over critical elements of Key Terms infrastructure and built environment and can Integrated climate-security programming is the holistic intensify tensions and perpetuate inequalities approach of embedding both climate and security and conflict dynamics. Scarce urban considerations into the entire lifecycle of projects—from resources, such as essential goods and design and implementation to evaluation. This strategy services like housing, water, and security aims to guarantee that climate finance initiatives are not represent incentives for NSAGs to explore only environmentally sustainable but also conflict-sensitive. both material gain and political influence.2 Conflict parties may occupy public buildings Conflict sensitivity is an organizational process where such as schools and hospitals to assert their knowledge of the peace and conflict dynamics in the authority and restrict access to key facilities. operational context is gathered through a locally informed Communication networks can be targeted to perspective and applied to avoid unintended negative manipulate information flow. Vital utilities, consequences and maximize positive effects on peace. such as water treatment plants and power Conflict- sensitive practices exist on a spectrum between stations, may be manipulated to control 'do-no-harm’ (e.g., conflict assessment, safeguards, redress essential resources. The control of vital water mechanisms, etc.) and 'do-good’ (e.g., peace resources and power supply infrastructure, for responsiveness, peace co-benefits, peacebuilding, etc.). example, was a well-documented tactic used by ISIS to control populations in Northern Iraq The following subsections provide an overview during their campaign in 2014.3 NSAGs can of risks to projects in FCS, how projects in also seek control of economic activities by these contexts might exacerbate ongoing imposing taxes on businesses and individuals conflict dynamics, and what peacebuilding in certain areas, influencing urban or rural opportunities exist. We then provide guidance development.4 on how to incorporate conflict sensitivity into projects. The overview and guidance are based Infrastructure and the built environment play on a literature review of publicly available a crucial role in shaping societies. They are * UNOPS, ‘Infrastructure and Peacebuilding: The role of 3 Strategic foresight group, ‘Water and violence: Crisis of infrastructure in building and sustaining peace, January 2020, survival in the Middle East,’ 2014, p. 19. p. 11. 4 Jones, Stephen and Simon Howarth. ‘Supporting 1 International Committee of the Red Cross section ‘Allies, infrastructure development in fragile and conflict-affected Partners and Proxies: Support Relationships in Armed states: learning from experience.’ Oxford Policy Management. Conflict. Essential services’ August 2012. 2 Sampaio, Antonio, ‘Urban Resources and Their Linkage to 5 Galster, George and Patrick Sharkey. ‘Spatial Foundations of Political Agendas for Armed Groups in Cities’ Global Initiative Inequality: A Conceptual Model and Empirical Overview’ RSF: against Transnational Organized Crime The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. Vol. 3, No. 2, Spatial Foundations of Inequality. February 2017. Page 2 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment material and include additional resources for enhance their legitimacy in the eyes of the further reading. population as part of an eventual state- building process.9 Political instability: FCS are frequently subject 2. Risks and Opportunities for GCF to volatile political environments with changes Projects in Infrastructure and Built in government or alterations in power Environment dynamics, which can ultimately lead to 2.1. Security Risks Impacting Projects unpredicted policy changes, delays in project approvals or permits, or cancellations of Several conflict risks may negatively impact infrastructure projects. The lack of projects related to infrastructure and the built administrative efficiency, such as non- environment. Some of the risks are highlighted transparent decision-making processes, below: political instability and inconsistent policies Destruction of infrastructure and the built may ultimately affect administrative decisions environment: In FCS, there is a higher risk of and can significantly impact projects in their damage or destruction to infrastructure, both success and implementation.10 existing and built by a project,6 including critical public services and community buildings that are intended to be “climate- 1) Lessons from GCF Projects proofed”.7 Such damage may disrupt normal The African Development Bank’s Programme for Integrated activities and operations and require Development and Adaptation to Climate Change in the Niger additional resources and efforts to restore or Basin highlights conflict-sensitive programming in addressing rebuild critical damaged infrastructure. climate challenges related to infrastructure and built Occupation by conflict parties: Infrastructure environment projects. As climate change disrupts pastoralist often becomes closely linked to military access migration routes, competition intensifies between farmers and and usage. Due to power struggles in FCS, pastoralists over land and water. To mitigate these tensions, the infrastructure becomes vulnerable to violence project introduces small multi-purpose dams, the development from all parties involved in conflict, making it a of 19,000 ha of irrigated land, and transhumance corridors. channel for or target of increased aggression Integrated landscape management ensures shared resource and exploitation.8 NSAGs may seek to modify usage, with agreements between farmers and herders the built environment in the interest of military safeguarding both crops and grazing areas. By emphasizing operations, reinforcing territorial control and cooperative resource management and strategic infrastructure strengthening presence in FCS. Project development, the project aims to reduce potential conflicts and activities may be suspended or delayed due to promote community harmony. insecurity and instability, affecting the timely completion of the project. For many NSAGs, establishing governance mechanisms and, in Uncertain legal and regulatory frameworks: some cases, providing service functions is not FCS are often characterized by weak legal and merely a means of extorting economic gains regulatory systems around infrastructure- from populations in FCS, but also a strategy to related projects, which may lead to uncertainty 6 UNOPS ‘Infrastructure and Peacebuilding: The role of 9 Danish Institute for International Studies, ‘From the power of infrastructure in building and sustaining peace,’ January 2020. guns to civilian acceptance - When armed groups provide 7 As per the GCF’s projects related to climate resilient public services’ October 2017 infrastructure. 10 OECD ‘Getting Infrastructure Right: The Ten Key Governance 8 UNOPS ‘Infrastructure and Peacebuilding: The role of Challenges and Policy Options’ The OECD Framework for the infrastructure in building and sustaining peace’ January 2020 governance of Infrastructure. Page 3 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment and challenges in obtaining the necessary Competition over natural resources: permits and approvals for such projects to go Infrastructure projects can involve the ahead. Risks related to political and/or allocation of scarce resources such as water, regulatory frameworks can arise since land, or energy. In FCS, where natural infrastructure projects can interfere with the resources may already be scarce, projects can political economy of conflict, with political intensify competition and disputes involving elites potentially interrupting project different actors. These tensions can lead to approvals that might challenge their political conflicts over natural resource access and power11 or business interests. distribution, which have a vital role in sustaining communities’ economic stability Cross-border and regional implications: and livelihoods. Any threat related to the Projects near borders or regions prone to access to natural resources can lead to the conflict may be exposed to additional risks aggravation of tensions and even conflict.14 because of past struggles or owing to tensions with neighboring countries.12 Risks can arise Displacement and land tenure issues: due to the involvement of several countries Community resettlement may often form part with a complex, and often divergent, of infrastructure-related projects requiring the regulatory environment of infrastructure compulsory expropriation of land and the development. Important geopolitical and relocation of communities to alternative diplomatic factors may lead to cost increases locations.15 For example, an estimated 80 and slower development stages. These million people have been displaced by dam problems may result from a lack of political will projects worldwide.16 When infrastructure and support from the two or more projects require the displacement of governmental parties involved, from complex communities, particularly in regions with relations or agreements between various indigenous populations without legally secure stakeholders in certain project regions, or land rights, forced evictions and land disputes from difficult regional economic can arise, hampering social cohesion and cooperation.13 stability in conflict-prone regions.17 Interference with local livelihoods: Infrastructure implementation in FCS poses 2.2. Security Risks Generated by several risks. The vulnerability of FCS to Projects environmental, climatic, and health hazards When operating in FCS, infrastructure and highlights the need to assess potential built-environment projects are not only negative socio-environmental impacts. subject to conflict risks and political instability. Infrastructure development can affect The projects themselves may also exacerbate traditional livelihoods reliant on natural existing conflict dynamics, creating new resources. These subsistence livelihoods may tensions. The following set of risks are some of also reflect a community’s religious or cultural the most common: heritage. Conflicting views on resource 11 DeGood, Kevin, ‘Infrastructure Investment Decisions Are 14 Watkins, George, et al., ‘Lessons from four decades of Political, Not Technical,’ CAP, 14 April 2020. URL infrastructure project-related conflicts in Latin America and the 12 The European investment Bank ‘Cross-border infrastructure Caribbean’ Inter-American Development Bank 2017. projects: The European Investment Bank’s role in cross-border 15 Lindsay, Jonathan Mills, ‘Compulsory Acquisition of Land and infrastructure projects,’ 2023. Compensation in Infrastructure Projects’ World Bank, 2012. 13 Fujimura, Manabu and Ramesh Adhikari, ‘Critical Evaluation 16 Walicki, Nadine, et al., ‘Dams and Internal Displacement,’ of Cross-Border Infrastructure Projects in Asia,’ ADBI Working IDMC, Applied Social Analysis, and Oregon State University, 11 Paper Series, July 2010. April 2017. 17 G. Watkins, et al (2017). Page 4 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment allocation and its potential socioeconomic Cementing or exacerbating conflict dynamics: effects can lead to resistance or can escalate Especially in urban landscapes, a country’s into conflict.18 Prioritizing short-term economic and political elite can implement outcomes over building comprehensive infrastructure projects as a powerful tool to infrastructure capacity may hamper long-term enable or cement patterns of segregation, sustainable and climate-resilient sectarianism, gentrification, or other forms of development.19 social separation and exclusion. Overlooking such dynamics may result in infrastructure Lack of community engagement and projects which favor or strengthen existing consultation: Insufficient consultation and patterns of separation or exclusion to the engagement with local communities in project detriment of equity and social cohesion.23 design, planning and decision-making processes — especially “infrastructure in adaptation processes 2.3. Peace Responsiveness Entry that introduce nature- projects can be Points based solutions20 — can instrumentalized lead to community By applying key best practices and standards as a powerful tool mistrust and resistance, of peacebuilding investment,24 climate hampering the success mitigation efforts focused on infrastructure by a country’s and sustainability of the and the built environment can and should economic and project. Ignoring contribute to peace and stability by addressing community engagement the challenges faced by communities in FCS. political elite to and local partnerships Examples of such pathways include: enable or cement can negatively impact A holistic approach for resilient infrastructure patterns of local communities, development: When considering the impact of exacerbating tensions.21 segregation, critical infrastructure in society, it is crucial to Affected communities highlight interconnections between different sectarianism, are also setting up ‘Not sectors. Power, water, and transportation gentrification” In My Back Yard’ (NIMBY) infrastructure function as interconnected movements against systems, with specific vulnerabilities and large development exposure to specific risks.25 Adopting a holistic projects.22 As the green energy transition approach to infrastructure development intensifies globally, these movements will through systems connectivity can foster likely grow in size, creating even more greater resilience, facilitating the movement of opposition to green development, whether projects are trying to engage with communities or not. 18 Ramos Suárez, Eduardo and Gabriel Pérez. ‘Development 23 Bollens, Scott A., ‘Urban planning and peace and conflicts linked to infrastructure. construction’ Bulleting building,’ Progress in Planning, 66(2), 67-139, 2006. 24 FAL, Issue 361, No. 1, 2018. See for example Peace Bond Standard (2023), Version: 2.0 19 UNOPS ‘Infrastructure and Peacebuilding: The role of June, Finance for Peace, Geneva, Switzerland. / Peace Equity infrastructure in building and sustaining peace’ January 2020 Standard (2023), Version: 2.0 June, Finance for Peace, Geneva, 20 The World Bank report ‘Nature-based Solutions for Climate: Switzerland. 25 Resilience and Adaptation’ Almaleh, Abdulaziz, ‘Measuring Resilience in Smart 21 Ibid. Infrastructures: A Comprehensive Review of Metrics and 22 Hager, Carol, ‘Grassroots Protest and Innovation: A New Look Methods’ Applied Sciences 2023 at NIMBY,’ Items: Insights from the Social Sciences, 17 October 2017. (url) Page 5 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment vital goods, such as medicines and food, as well as access to vital services, such as health 2) Lessons from GCF Projects and education.26 The Simiyu Climate Resilient Project by Kreditanstalt für Human-centered approach to resilient Wiederaufbau integrates a conflict-sensitive approach to infrastructure projects: Adopting conflict- combat water scarcity, emphasizing benefits for vulnerable sensitive efforts to ensure infrastructure communities. The project promotes inclusion by adopting projects are adaptable and resilient to drivers block tariffs, prioritizing public taps in impoverished areas, of conflict is key when working with a human- and ensuring representation of women and vulnerable centered approach to development groups in decision-making bodies. This approach aligns with infrastructure.27 By ensuring inclusion for SDG 16's vision of peaceful, inclusive societies, fostering marginalized groups — such as youth and transparent governance, community-based planning, and women, or ethnic, cultural, and religious reducing potential conflicts between farming and minorities — projects can contribute to the pastoralism. The holistic involvement of all users in mitigation of hidden and overt conflicts. decision-making not only strengthens community bonds Addressing inequitable access to essential but also enhances local revenue stability. public infrastructure service projects may enable divided communities to develop or Enhancing sustainability through infrastructure rebuild critical spaces in the interest of compliance and development: When ensuring community development and regional public-level sustainability standards, it is growth.28 crucial for projects to comply with Project adaptability and sustainability: infrastructure requirements. This entails Infrastructure projects can enhance aligning the assessment of public needs with sustainable outcomes for the well-being of broader community development future generations. They can implement a objectives.31 Infrastructure projects can comprehensive and strategic assessment of contribute to creating fair and efficient legal life cycle sustainability to ensure resilient long- systems that support economic growth, term infrastructure projects, adaptable to the community well-being and responsible use of different needs of ecosystems they operate in natural resources. Projects should encourage and to the beneficiary communities.29 By proper public record-keeping practices, addressing challenges proactively, projects support infrastructure development can ensure environmentally and socially investment policies, and build trust at national responsible project development. They can and regional levels. 32 prevent the need for future financing to fix or Promoting secure ownership: In infrastructure rebuild essential structures, meeting higher and built-environment projects, safeguarding infrastructure performance and sustainability the land ownership rights of smallholders standards.30 becomes crucial. Special attention should be 26 Okkonen, Lasse and Olli Lehtonen. ‘Socio-Economic Impacts 29 UNEP. ‘Future-proofing Infrastructure to address the climate, of Community Wind Power Projects in Northern Scotland,’ biodiversity, and pollution crises’ UNEP, Nairobi. 2021. renewable Energy, Vol. 85. 2018. 30 Hussain, Shahid, et al. ‘Assessing the Socio-Economic Impacts 27 Mitoulis, Stergios-Aristoteles, et al. ‘Conflict-resilience of Rural Infrastructure Projects on Community Development framework for critical infrastructure peacebuilding.’ Buildings.’ Buildings 2022, 12(7), 947. December 2022. Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 91, April 2023 31 Pavlovskaia, Evgania. ‘Using Sustainability Criteria in Law.’ 28 Lim, Susan and Alessandra Heinemann, ‘Human-Centered International Journal Environmental Protection Policy. 2013. Design: Putting People at the Heart of Urban Transport 32 Hussain, Shahid, et al. ‘Assessing the Socio-Economic Impacts Infrastructure Planning’ the Asian Development Bank, 15 of Rural Infrastructure Projects on Community Development January 2019. URL Buildings.’ Buildings 2022, 12(7), 947. December 2022. Page 6 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment paid to protecting land areas where the project processing facilities, can encourage dialogue activities take place. Projects should consult between groups, create shared values, and land tenure arrangements, adopting a promote intracommunal cooperation.36 comprehensive approach to acknowledging formal and traditional land ownership and use. They should recognize property rights 3. Recommendations and the significance of sacred indigenous land 3.1. Conflict-sensitive Programming in in compliance with customary law, local the GCF traditions, and land tenure systems. By promoting secure ownership of land, projects There is a wealth of guidance and tools on can proactively prevent future land-related delivering conflict-sensitive projects related to tensions or conflicts and ensure a more secure infrastructure and the built environment, and and equitable ownership and use of the built on how to adequately address challenges as environment. 33 they arise: Promoting community-based and economy- Planning the project: The GCF Initial boosting infrastructure: Community-based Investment Framework may benefit by infrastructure projects have the most applying conflict sensitivity to the investment significant positive effects on promoting and criteria, in particular ‘needs of the recipient sustaining peace.34 community’, ‘sustainable development “infrastructure Construction phases are potential’ and ‘country ownership’. A robust the most likely stages for application can then proceed, based on a projects have the conflicts to arise. During strong understanding of the targeted area, potential of being construction, concerned including the current state of infrastructure peace-promoting in communities and different systems with a particular focus on critical social groups consider infrastructure related to energy, healthcare, terms of how to coexist and transportation and water.37 To do this, implementing more collaborate effectively.35 baseline analysis and stakeholder mapping transparent and Infrastructure projects can illuminate understanding of the problem, that focus on community as well as whom it affects and how.38 inclusive livelihoods may stimulate Documenting these different realities governance local economies by experienced by different groups can improve systems that connecting people, the inclusivity of programming and help reducing stereotypes and identify potential solutions or contribute to ensure better sponsoring dialogue, as already existing efforts. This stage can further accessibility” well as generating local ensure that the next steps are conflict- employment and incomes, sensitive by defining a co-benefit indicator and and addressing economic grievances. In acquiring free, prior, and informed consent addition, communally accessible from stakeholders. infrastructures, such as water wells or 33 Oxfam Tanzania report ‘Balancing Infrastructure 36 Dresse, Anaïs, et al., ‘Environmental peacebuilding: Towards Development and Community Livelihoods’ a theoretical framework’. Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 54, is. 34 Bachmann, Jan and Peer Schouten, ‘Concrete approaches to 1, 2019 peace: infrastructure as peacebuilding,’ International Affairs, 37 CDA. ‘Conflict Sensitivity in Land Governance: The Do No Vol. 94, Issue 2, March 2018. Harm Framework and Other Tools for Practitioners of Land 35 Wang, Wanting and John W. van de Lindt ‘Quantifying the Activities.’ Cambridge, MA: CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, effect of improved school and residential building codes for March 2022. p. 18-19. tornadoes in community resilience’ 2022. 38 Ibid., p. 52-53. Page 7 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment Implementing the project: During activities’ that can impact infrastructure, and on the rollout, operational risks can be mitigated by implementation of conflict sensitivity robust early-warning systems for insecurity, measures is particularly relevant. It may also engagement with stakeholders, and be helpful to assess perceptions of the project contingency funding for security-related and potential negative effects of resource delays. Some planning tools can help mitigate allocation (whether verified or perceived), and the risks of contributing to insecurity and the perception of RAFT (Respect, operational risks by extension. For example, Accountability, Fairness and Transparency) on projects should clearly define the the part of beneficiaries.44 beneficiaries, staff, and partners,39 starting Throughout the project: The project can be with the least controversial issues to build more conflict-sensitive — during planning, confidence between stakeholders.40 At this implementation, and monitoring and stage, negative impacts can be further evaluation — through conflict resolution prevented by regularly engaging stakeholders training for staff, a designated conflict and and addressing their concerns, in particular peace focal point, consistent stakeholder through adequate grievance and inclusion, and information transparency.45 compensation mechanisms. Activities avoid worsening security when implementing staff and partners display positive behavior 3.2. Peacebuilding Actions Related to patterns to beneficiaries,41 and when Infrastructure and Built Environment distribution of project resources accounts for potential negative impacts.42 Co-benefits can Promoting benefit sharing and conflict be further leveraged by activities through resolution governance structures: Improved regular and open communication, which can infrastructure typically enhances access to bring stakeholders closer, reveal opportunities services and provides better transportation for peace dividends and raise awareness for for people and communities. However, these benefits do not necessarily promote peace.46 durable dispute resolution mechanisms. Finally, a well-designed exit strategy can Infrastructure projects have the potential to ensure that conflict in cities and urban areas build peace in terms of implementing more does not reignite and that resilience to transparent and inclusive governance compounded climate-related risks is systems. They can ensure improved increased.43 accessibility, reducing competition and increasing trust and legitimacy in institutions. Monitoring and evaluating the project: During and after activities, project staff should Supporting capacity building and employment: monitor both operational risks and the While infrastructure can decrease isolation of project’s impacts on the security context. Data rural areas and increase access to markets for on the evolution and emergence of sources of people and communities, it doesn’t necessarily tension and cohesion, on changing dynamics improve security.47 Projects need to incorporate training and capacity-building 39 Ibid., p. 56. situations of conflict and fragility.’ Publications Office of the 40 UNEP. ‘Toolkit and guidance for preventing and managing European Union. 2021. land and natural resources conflict: Land and conflict.’ 2012. 44 CDA, 2022, p. 39-41. 41 Ibid., p. 39-41. 45 USAID. ‘Operational Guidelines for Responsible Land-based 42 Ibid., p. 37-38. Investment.’ March 2015. (url) 43 European Commission. Guidance notes on conflict 46 Schouten, Peer and Jan Bachmann, ‘Roads to peace? The Role sensitivity in development cooperation – An update and of Infrastructure in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States,’ DIIS supplement to the EU staff handbook on ‘Operating in and UNOPS, January 2017, p. 10. 47 Ibid., p. 16. Page 8 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment programs to develop skills related to institutions, to be more inclusive and to invite entrepreneurship and infrastructure in the more women’s participation.49 This could start, workforce, focusing in particular on youth and for example, by working to achieve a better marginalized communities. gender balance in community decision- making bodies for infrastructure planning. Securing land rights: There is no ‘one size fits Also, where discriminatory customary all' approach when it comes to securing land practices are deeply embedded, a strategy tenure rights; it will depend on the legal, could be to work with the least discriminatory cultural, and environmental conditions in the institutions to at least try to change the status specific context.48 Projects can help in quo. Initial work can generate evidence and recognizing communities’ rights to land by experience, raising voices and confidence, and developing tailor-made, context-specific and then address other institutions. participatory land use planning strategies. This approach ensures that local stakeholders — Fostering partnerships with Civil Society: Due especially women, youth, marginalized to the lack of agreement and clarity on communities, indigenous peoples, displaced infrastructure in many FCS, it is important to populations, tribes and other groups — have foster partnerships with Civil Society legal recognition and ownership of land. This Organizations (CSOs). They can help to resolve is especially relevant in the context of conflicts related to infrastructure through infrastructure projects expanding into remote peacebuilding actions, for example, by land areas in FCS. promoting regulatory frameworks and strong rule of law. Using participatory approaches to Addressing the gender gap: Projects can infrastructure design, development, and promote equal rights and address the gender implementation can help tailor the project and gap in infrastructure development by its objectives to the intended beneficiaries. empowering women and women’s groups. Women can claim spaces in decision-making around infrastructure. They can raise their voices. Projects should inform and support strong institutions, including customary 5. Recommended Reading: Adelphi, UNEP, and the EU. ‘Addressing climate-related security risks: Conflict sensitivity for climate change adaptation and sustainable livelihoods.’ Guidance note, toolbox, and monitoring and evaluation note. 2022. Danish Institute for International Studies, ‘From the power of guns to civilian acceptance - When armed groups provide public services. October 2017. Büscher, Karen. ‘African cities and violent conflict: the urban dimension of conflict and post-conflict dynamics in Central and Eastern Africa,’ Journal of Eastern African Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2, 193-210. 2018 Notices from European Union Institutions, Bodies, Offices and Agencies. The European Commission notice ‘Technical guidance on the climate proofing of infrastructure in the period 2021-2027’ Official Journal of the European Union. 2021. 48 Wehrmann, Babette and Andrea Lange, ‘Secure Land 49 SDC, ‘Gender and Land Governance,’ Guidance note. 2017. p. Tenure Rights for All: A key condition for sustainable 5. development,’ GIZ, July 2019. Page 9 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment Läderach, Peter, Julian Ramirez-Villegas, Giulia Caroli, Claudia Sadoff, and Grazia Pacillo. “Climate Finance and Peace— Tackling the Climate and Humanitarian Crisis.” The Lancet Planetary Health 5, no. 12 (December 2021): e856–58. URL Sampaio, Antônio. ‘Urban Resources and Their Linkage to Political Agendas for Armed Groups in Cities’ Journal of Illicit Economies and Development, 2(2), p.171–187. 2020. The World Bank ‘Nature-based Solutions for Climate: Resilience and Adaptation’ World Bank Group Priorities at COP27. URL Scartozzi, Cesare M. “Conflict Sensitive Climate Finance: Lessons from the Green Climate Fund.” Climate Policy, May 21, 2023. URL UNOPS ‘Infrastructure and Peacebuilding: The role of infrastructure in building and sustaining peace’. January 2020 URL 6. Bibliography Almaleh, Abdullaziz. ‘Measuring Resilience in Smart Infrastructures: A Comprehensive Review of Metrics and Methods’ Applied Sciences. 2023 URL Bachmann, Jan and Peer Schouten. ‘Concrete approaches to peace: infrastructure as peacebuilding’ International Affairs, Volume 94, Issue 2. March 2018 URL Bollens, Scott A. ‘Urban planning and peace building.’ Progress in Planning, 66(2), 67-139. 2006. DeGood, Kevin, ‘Infrastructure Investment Decisions Are Political, Not Technical,’ CAP, 14 April 2020. URL Dresse, Anaïs, et al. ‘Environmental peacebuilding: Towards a theoretical framework.’ Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 54, Is. 1, 2019. Fujimura, Manabu and Ramesh Adhikari. ‘Critical Evaluation of Cross-Border Infrastructure Projects in Asia’ ADBI Working Paper Series. July 2010. Galster, George and Patrick Sharkey. ‘Spatial Foundations of Inequality: A Conceptual Model and Empirical Overview’ RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. Vol. 3, No. 2, Spatial Foundations of Inequality. February 2017. Hager, Carol. ‘Grassroots Protest and Innovation: A New Look at NIMBY.’ Items: Insights from the Social Sciences. 17 October 2017. URL Hussain, Shahid, et al. ‘Assessing the Socio-Economic Impacts of Rural Infrastructure Projects on Community Development Buildings.’ Buildings 2022, 12(7), 947. December 2022. Jones, Stephen and Simon Howarth. ‘Supporting infrastructure development in fragile and conflict-affected states: learning from experience.’ Oxford Policy Management. August 2012. Lim, Susan and Alessandra Heinemann. ‘Human-Centered Design: Putting People at the Heart of Urban Transport Infrastructure Planning.’ the Asian Development Bank. 15 January 2019. URL Lindsay, Jonathan Mills. ‘Compulsory Acquisition of Land and Compensation in Infrastructure Projects.’ PPP Insight, Vol. 1, Is. 3. 2012. Mitoulis, Stergios-Aristoteles, et al. ‘Conflict-resilience framework for critical infrastructure peacebuilding.’ Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 91, April 2023. Notices from European Union Institutions, Bodies, Offices and Agencies. The European Commission notice ‘Technical guidance on the climate proofing of infrastructure in the period 2021-2027’ Official Journal of the European Union. 2021. URL Page 10 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment Okkonen, Lasse and Olli Lehtonen. ‘Socio-Economic Impacts of Community Wind Power Projects in Northern Scotland,’ Renewable Energy, Vol. 85. 2018. Oxfam Tanzania report ‘Balancing Infrastructure Development and Community Livelihoods’ URL Pavlovskaia, Evgania. ‘Using Sustainability Criteria in Law.’ International Journal Environmental Protection Policy. 2013. Ramos Suárez, Eduardo and Gabriel Pérez. ‘Development and conflicts linked to infrastructure. construction’ Bulleting FAL, Issue 361, No. 1, 2018. Sampaio, Antônio. ‘Urban Resources and Their Linkage to Political Agendas for Armed Groups in Cities’ Journal of Illicit Economies and Development, 2(2), p.171–187. 2020. Schouten, Peer and Jan Bachmann. ‘Roads to peace? The Role of Infrastructure in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States.’ DIIS and UNOPS. January 2017. The European Investment Bank ‘Cross-border infrastructure projects: The European Investment Bank’s role in cross- border infrastructure projects.’ 2023 URL The World Economic Forum and The Boston Consulting Group ‘Industry Agenda Strategic Infrastructure Mitigation of Political & Regulatory Risk in Infrastructure Projects.’ February 2015 URL UNEP. ‘Future-proofing Infrastructure to address the climate, biodiversity, and pollution crises’ UNEP, Nairobi. 2021. UNOPS Infrastructure for Peacebuilding: The role of infrastructure in tackling the underlying drivers of fragility. September 2020. Walicki, Nadine, et al., ‘Dams and Internal Displacement,’ IDMC, Applied Social Analysis, and Oregon State University, 11 April 2017. Wang, Wanting and John W. van de Lindt, ‘Quantifying the effect of improved school and residential building codes for tornadoes in community resilience’. Resilient Cities and Structures, Vol 1, Is. 1. 2022. Watkins, Graham. ‘Lessons from four decades of infrastructure project-related conflicts in Latin America and the Caribbean.’ Inter-American Development Bank. 2017 URL Wehrmann, Babette and Andrea Lange, ‘Secure Land Tenure Rights for All: A key condition for sustainable development,’ GIZ, July 2019. Page 11 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment About the Series: The “Guidance Notes for Peace-Informed Programming at the Green Climate Fund” is a thematic series published by CGIAR in partnership with Interpeace, with the support of TrustWorks Global. The series consists of eight briefs that provide sectoral risk analyses and guidance tailored to the Green Climate Fund's Result Areas. Recognizing the complex nexus between climate change and peace, the series aims to provide actionable strategies to assist both Accredited Entities and Direct Entities to understand and manage project risks as well as to maximize opportunities to promote peace. The series is published as part of the Climate Security Programming Dashboard for Climate Finance (CSPDxCF). The dashboard is an all-in-one solution for preliminary conflict sensitive assessments and tailored guidance, targeting projects funded by international financial institutions and climate funds. CGIAR-Interpeace Partnership: CGIAR Focus Climate Security and Interpeace collaborate at the intersection of climate finance, conflict, and peace. Drawing from CGIAR's expertise in climate science and Interpeace's experience accompanying peacebuilding processes, they aim to enhance conflict sensitive climate finance and improve the delivery of funds towards communities most at risk. Related Briefs and Toolkits:  Climate Security Programming Dashboard for Climate Finance (CSPDxCF).  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Health, Food, and Water Security.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Livelihoods of People and Communities.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Infrastructure and Built Environment.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Energy Generation and Access.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Buildings, Cities, Industries, and Appliances.  Guidance Note for Peace-Informed Programming: Forest and Land Use. Discover all the related guidance notes and the CSPDxCF dashboard at: http://cspd.cso.cgiar.org/. Page 12 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment Authors: Cesare M. Scartozzi+, Giulia Caroli+, Carolina Sarzana+, Peter Läderach+, Grazia Pacillo+, Daniel Hyslopo, Andreas Luis Hahno, Elio Azaro, Giorgia Nicatore, Oliver Brownx, Komal Hassamalx, Simon Ehmsenx. + Alliance Bioversity International - CIAT / CGIAR FOCUS Climate Security o Interpeace, International Organization for Peacebuilding X TrustWorks Global Publication Date: 21/11/2023 Copyright: 2023 CGIAR System Organization, CC BY 4.0. Disclaimer: This publication has been prepared for information purposes only. No claim or representation is made or warranty given as to the accuracy, completeness or authenticity of the information. CGIAR, the Alliance of Bioversity & CIAT, and Interpeace shall not in any way be held liable for any loss or direct or indirect damage caused by any inaccuracies or errors in the publication. The publication is an independent product and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the Green Climate Fund. Acknowledgements: This work was carried out with support of the CGIAR Initiative on Climate Resilience (ClimBeR) and the CGIAR Initiative on Fragility, Conflict, and Migration (FCM). We would like to thank all funders who supported this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund. CGIAR System Organization: Alliance Bioversity - CIAT: Interpeace Head Office: 1000, Avenue Agropolis, Via di San Domenico, 1, Maison de la Paix, F-34394 Montpellier, France. 00153 Rome, Italy. 2E Chemin Eugène-Rigot, P: +33 (0)467047800 P: +39 0661181 1202 Geneva, Switzerland. Page 13 | Guidance Note for GCF: Infrastructure and Built Environment