Until now, these questions have been difficult to answer because of uncertainty on whether the rising number of people in camps has been caused purely by the sharp increase in IDPs as a whole, or whether changes in the response by international agencies also played a role. This report concludes that the main drivers of the increasing population in camps has been the increasing "saturation" of communities with IDPs, and the longer periods for which people are displaced. Those are not, however, the total explanation. Humanitarian agencies have increasingly directed energy and resources towards camps, while assistance to IDPs in host families and host families themselves at the household level has mostly not been provided. Once established, camps create a multiplying effect as people follow one another in search of food and basic needs such as water and health services.

This study, based on recent interviews and field research in eastern DRC, provides new evidence to support a far higher priority to be given for assistance to hosted IDPs and their host families. This is not simply because these are vulnerable groups whose needs have been traditionally under-addressed. It is also because displaced people usually prefer living with host families rather than in camps, because they are seen as more "physically, emotionally and spiritually" secure. Providing assistance mainly through camps undermines traditional coping mechanisms that can provide safer and more effective aid, and effectively limits the choices available to displaced people. The basic principle is that people should be able to go where they feel safest and assistance should be provided in ways that support livelihoods and help to keep families together.

A publication by Oxfam Great Britain for Oxfam International.

In the DRC, increasing violence has forced people to flee from their homes, and led to the deaths of almost 1,500 people a day. Though no other conflict causes that kind of death rate, Oxfam's workers hear similar stories of murder, rape, and displacement from men and women from Colombia to Sudan every day. Sixty years after the main Geneva Conventions enshrined civilians' rights to protection, they are violated in every current conflict.

Some states and non-state actors choose to kill civilians, or pursue strategies in which civilians are too likely to die. Some governments choose to protect their citizens: to keep them safe. Some do not protect all of them, or not well enough. There are, however, successful examples of protecting civilians that show what governments and others can do when they choose to.

They have an interest in protecting civilians, because mass atrocities fuel the conflicts that, in an interdependent world, create security threats that cannot be contained. And an increasing number of governments have a "moral interest" too, because their electorates expect them to help prevent, not just condemn, the atrocities they see beamed around the world through modern information technology.

Governments and others can reduce the mass atrocities that blight the world in the early twenty-first century

To do so, they need to make four key changes.

• Make the protection of civilians the overriding priority in the response to conflicts everywhere—actively working to protect civilians, and upholding the Responsibility to Protect civilians from mass atrocities, agreed at the 2005 UN World Summit, as a cornerstone of policy;
• Adopt zero tolerance of war crimes—whether in counter-terrorism or elsewhere—applying the same standard of international opprobrium to war crimes committed by friends or foes alike;
• Act much more quickly to tackle the trends that threaten new or prolonged conflicts—including poverty and inequality, climate change, and arms proliferation—so that we can be better at preventing as well as reacting to conflicts;
• Join up effective action at every level, from local communities to the UN Security Council—so that international action works in conjunction with what works on the ground. To help achieve this, the way the UN Security Council works should be urgently reformed with greater transparency and accountability, in which the Council's members have to account for their performance in pursuing international peace and security, including their Responsibility to Protect civilians from mass atrocities. All permanent members of the Security Council should renounce the use of their veto when the Council is discussing situations of actual or incipient war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

From Poverty to Power sets out a vision of women and men in communities everywhere who are equipped with education, enjoy good health, have rights, dignity, and voice—and are in charge of their own destinies.

What is required to achieve that vision is nothing less than a global new deal: a redistribution of power, opportunities, and assets. Oxfam's experience shows that the necessary redistribution can best be accomplished through a combination of active citizens and effective nation states.

This need is particularly relevant to Oxfam's aid reform initiative. Well-designed aid programs complement and support national and community development efforts, strengthening both active citizens and effective states. In contrast, poorly designed aid competes with states and citizens or even undermines them. For the US to become a global leader in smart development, it should focus on strengthening responsible and effective states and helping active citizens to foster equitable economic growth through their own efforts.

To learn more about this publication, as well as how to obtain your copy, visit FP2P.org.

Although the force of the storms was an act of nature, what the American people have since witnessed—an uneven and often incompetent recovery effort—is the result of deliberate human acts. If we refuse to address this as a nation, it will go down in history not only as a failure of leadership, but also as a failure to hold our government accountable.

Two fundamental indicators, housing and jobs, provide stark proof of the stalled recovery. Full recovery is possible only when affordable homes are coupled with secure, decent jobs. Without quality jobs and affordable housing, low- and moderate income families are unable to return to their former lives. Decent wages allow people to return home and recreate vibrant communities by providing the necessary workforce to rebuild the region.

The situation grows increasingly critical, but despite challenges, there is a way forward. We face a historic election; the next president of the US must guarantee a just, equitable, and complete recovery. America must take immediate action to ensure that people struggling to rebuild their communities get the support that their hard work and innovation demand.

This report explores the basic concepts of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and explores key social issues the mining industry must face in Peru. It includes a summary of the main national and international regulations, standards, and guidelines that will help Peru’s mining sector implement essential aspects of a good CSR program.

The report also recommends that the government, mining industry, and civil society jointly develop reference guides for employment, land acquisition and voluntary resettlement, public consultation, participatory monitoring, and social investments.

Corporate Social Responsibility in the Mining Sector in Peru seeks to take a first step towards meaningful dialogue about CSR among the different actors involved to help civil society obtain the highest benefits from CSR policies and actions implemented by government and corporations.

This executive summary presents the broader lessons from APPPA's findings and documents a sample of the vast selection of personal understandings of poverty from people living in Afghanistan. By providing these first-hand perspectives, the APPPA aims to contribute to increasingly relevant, effective poverty reduction projects.