Remove all UNHCR extractions for fresh start

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_1/raw/doc_1_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,122 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH**\n\n**Research Paper No. 127**\n\n# **Land conflicts and their impact on refugee women\u2019s** **livelihoods in southwestern Uganda**\n\n**Kalyango Ronald Sebba**\n\nDepartment of Women and Gender Studies\nMakerere University\nUganda\n\nE-mail kalyango@infocom.co.ug\n\nJuly 2006\n\n\n**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Policy Development and Evaluation Service**\n**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\n**CP 2500, 1211 Geneva 2**\n**Switzerland**\n\n**E-mail: hqep00@unhcr.org**\n**Web Site: www.unhcr.org**\n\nThese papers provide a means for UNHCR staff, consultants, interns and associates, as well\nas external researchers, to publish the preliminary results of their research on refugee-related\nissues. The papers do not represent the official views of UNHCR. They are also available\nonline under \u2018publications\u2019 at <www.unhcr.org>.\n\nISSN 1020-7473\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Introduction**\n\n\nThis paper presents the preliminary findings of a study on land conflicts between\nrefugees and host communities in southwestern Uganda and their impact on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods. Uganda has a long history of hosting refugees that dates back to\nthe 1940s, when it hosted Polish refugees; Rwandese and Sudanese in the 1950s\n(Holborn 1975:1213-1225). Refugees were placed in gazetted areas in close proximity\nto the local populations such as in the settlements of Nakivale, Oruchinga, Kyaka 1\nand II in Southwestern Uganda; Rhino Camp, Imvepi and Ikafe in the West Nile\nregion; Achol Pii, Parolinya and Adjumani settlements in Northern Uganda; and\nKiryandongo and Kyangwali settlements in Central Uganda.\n\n\nOn the whole, placement in rural settlements was based on an assumption that the\nrefugee problem was temporal and would end as soon as the circumstances that led to\ntheir flight had ceased (Pincwya, 1998:8-25). However, this has not been the case and\nthe government was not prepared for a protracted refugee situation exacerbated by an\nincrease in the population of both refugees and nationals.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and nationals are a result of government policy of\nsettling refugees in gazetted areas (Kalyango & Kirk, 2002). Placement in rural\nsettlements is based on the assumption that majority of refugees are of a rural\nbackground and can support themselves through agriculture until their repatriation\n(Kibreab, 1989; UNHCR, 2000, Jacobsen, 2001). Host populations first welcomed\nrefugees as those in need of protection and also as would-be beneficiaries of\ninfrastructure to be left behind on their repatriation (Harrell-Bond, 1986; 2002).\n\n\nHowever, as the refugee situation became protracted, hospitality gave way to a\ncompetition for resources such as agricultural and grazing land, water and forest\nresources (Pirouet, 1988; Bagenda et al, 2002; Jones, 2002). This has not been helped\nby persistent refugee flows from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo,\nKenya, Somalia, Burundi and Ethiopia resulting in increased xenophobia against\nrefugees and a call for them to repatriate.\n\n\nLand is central to the sustainable livelihoods of rural households. For them it is not\njust land per se but arable and grazing land on which they depend for their livelihood.\nAs a result, any conflict over land impacts the households directly, and this impact is\ngender differentiated (Verma, 2001:3-4). The impact of land conflicts on refugee\nwomen\u2019s livelihoods has to be situated in the larger context of land problems in Sub\nSaharan Africa.\n\n\nThese include but are not limited to growing land concentration and scarcity;\ncompetition over land use and environmental and land degradation. Other problems\ninclude corruption in land markets, indeterminate boundaries of customarily held\nlands, a weak land administration system, and a lack of equity in land systems\n(Tshikaka, 2004). Women\u2019s interests in land were eroded by colonial policies and\nagrarian change that never addressed the core issues of gendered accessibility and\nequity. For instance, processes of differentiation and individualisation of land rights\nand land shortages have resulted in the concentration of land rights in men (Tshikaka,\n2004; Verma, 2001).\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Research focus and aims**\n\n\nGender inequalities persist in refugee situations and limit the extent to which women\nand girls can attain sustainable livelihoods. According to the World Bank (2003),\ngender inequalities tend to lower productivity and intensify unequal distribution of\nresources. They also contribute to non-monetary aspects of poverty, such as lack of\nsecurity, opportunity and empowerment, which lower the quality of life for both men\nand women (Ibid.; Tinker 1990). Whereas refugee women and girls face the brunt of\nthese factors, protection and assistance has largely focused on men. This resonates\nthrough almost all refugee policies and practices, which focus on men as household\nheads (Kalyango, forthcoming).\n\n\nRefugee women have complained against the status quo because it discriminates them\nin asylum claims, acquisition of identity documents and food ration cards, limits their\nfreedom of movement and makes them dependent on men (UNHCR 2001). Despite\nseveral attempts to address this anomaly, such as in the Convention for the\nElimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and in the\nUNHCR guidelines for refugee women and for Sex and Gender Based Violence, wide\ngender disparities between women and men in refugee situations remain common\n(UNHCR, 2000; 2003; UNIFEM, 2003; ).\n\n\nThe overall objective of the study was to establish the gendered impact of land\nconflicts on livelihoods of refugee women. Specifically, the paper takes a special\nfocus on the gender dimensions of the land conflicts and their impact on household\nlivelihoods. Gender is construed to refer to the socially constructed differences\nbetween men and women. Differences are embedded in social relations and therefore\ndiffer between cultures; they are constituted through and also help to constitute the\nexercise of other forms of social difference such as those of age, race or class (Kabeer,\n1994).\n\n\nIn identifying the gender impacts of the land conflicts, analysis was based on the\nconcepts of identity and agency. Identity concerns the social process whereby\nindividuals come to identify themselves with a particular configuration of social roles\nand relationships and agency describes the strategies used by individuals to create a\nviable and satisfying life for themselves in the context of or in spite of these identities\n(El Bushra, 2000). These concepts, as El-Bushra (Ibid.) noted, enable an\nunderstanding of the nature of violent conflicts and also an interrogation of the\nmotivations of different actors in a conflict.\n\n\n**Area of study**\n\n\nThe study was carried out in southwestern Uganda, Nakivale refugee settlement\nestablished in the early 1960s to cater for Rwandese refugees fleeing a bitter\nTutsi/Hutu ethnic conflict in 1959. It spreads over 21,756 hectares and is located in a\nsemi arid zone with limited arable land. The main economic activity is animal rearing\nand agriculture by both refugees and host populations. Nakivale is found in one of the\nremotest areas of Mbarara district with poor transport and social infrastructure which\nmake it not easily accessible.\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Today, the settlement is home to over 15,000 refugees of different nationalities (see\ntable 1) and administered by a camp commandant under the government ministry of\nDisaster Preparedness and Refugees. UNHCR through its implementing partner the\nUganda Red Cross provides humanitarian assistance to the refugees. Unlike the host\npopulation, refugees have access to adequate social services provided by UNHCR.\nThis in itself has been a cause of xenophobia against refugees who are seen as more\nprivileged by the local population.\n\n\n**Table 1:** **Nakivale refugee population at 30 September 2004**\n\n|Age Group|0-4|Col3|5-17|Col5|18-59|Col7|60|Col9|Total|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|**Nationality**|M|F|M|F|M|F|M|F||\n|Rwandan|2596|2347|2009|1796|1967|1814|57|49|12,635|\n|Kenyan|0|0|0|1|1|1|0|0|3|\n|Somali|70|65|137|138|230|233|8|3|884|\n|Ethiopian|4|4|7|5|38|15|0|0|73|\n|Congolese|188|201|199|203|238|229|17|19|1,294|\n|Burundi|39|36|59|41|88|63|0|0|326|\n|Sudanese|6|6|15|25|19|18|0|0|89|\n|**Total**|2903|2659|2426|2209|2581|2373|82|71|15,304|\n\n\n\n_Source: Camp commandant\u2019s office, Nakivale_\n\nEver since its establishment, the settlement has been a centre of controversy as\nregards its size and original boundaries. Located in central Ankole [1], it has been prone\nto encroachment by the populace who saw it as an area for expansion of their grazing\nactivities. Encroachment was of two types: extension of national land holdings into\ngazetted land and land loans given to nationals by refugees. This was also precipitated\nby the fact that there was a shrink in land availability for settlement and grazing in\nsurrounding areas especially after gazetting of Lake Mburo National Park in 1983 and\nout migration from neighbouring districts of Bushenyi and Ntugamo.\n\n\nLand conflicts are fuelled by the fact that large expanses of settlement land are\nunutilised land since the refugee population is small. This has resulted in a limitation\non expansion of refugee agricultural activities especially women in other parts of the\nsettlements; limited access to natural resources such as fuel wood and water and\ngrazing land.\n\n\n**Land conflicts between refugees and host populations**\n\n\nGenerally, it is vital to place refugee - host population conflict over land in the context\nof Uganda\u2019s land tenure system. Land tenure is the mode of land holding, together\nwith terms and conditions of occupancy. It is about \u2018the bundle of rights\u2019 held and\nenjoyed in the land resource. The relative degree to which individuals can profit from\nland resources is influenced by three factors: utilisation, duration of occupancy and\nrelocation rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002). It is important to note that ambiguities exist\nin land tenure systems in Uganda as a result of its colonial history. For instance, at\nindependence in 1962, there were three land tenure systems: Mailo tenure, a system\nthat was exclusive to the kingdom of Buganda and traced its origins in the Buganda\n\n1 The people of Ankole are both pastorists and agriculturalists.\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "agreement of 1900; Freehold tenure, a system created under the Crown Land\nOrdinance of 1903; the native freeholds, where the community control over land was\nwoven into a number of land rights (Nuwagaba et al, 2002).\n\n\nThe degree of enjoyment of the land resource has become a point of contention\nbetween host populations and refugees. At first, refugees were settled in sparsely\npopulated areas and enjoyed good relations with the host populations (Holborn,\n1975:1212). However, population increase and the advent of a cash economy\nincreased the value of land, leading to strained social relations between refugees and\nnationals (Kasfir, 1988:158). Moreover, refugees are regarded as non-citizens who\nshould not have any rights over land.\n\n\nLand conflicts between refugees and host population can be attributed to two main\nfactors, that is, exceeding of field or residential boundaries (encroachment) and\nacquisition by nationals (sometimes in the form of land loans). Land conflicts in the\nrefugee hosting areas are partly attributed to lack of clear refugee settlement\nboundaries (Mugerwa, 1992; Nuwagaba, 2002; Bagenda, 2003). According to the\nchairman of the district land board in Mbarara, there are no clear demarcations\nbetween refugees\u2019 and host population\u2019s land [2] .\n\n\nThe lack of clarity can be traced to reluctance of the Ankole kingdom [3] to favour\npermanent settlement of refugees in 1962 when they were first given land to settle\n(Holborn, 1974:1223). As a result there has been increased encroachment on refugee\nland by nationals, a practice exacerbated by weak administration systems. For\ninstance, some encroachers have even acquired land tittles on gazetted land, since the\nprocedure of acquiring a land title is very simple and open to abuse. All one needs is\nto fill out an application form from the district land board and take them to Local\nCouncil 1 (LC1) and have a \u2018neighbour\u2019 sign for confirmation.\n\n\nAfter the District Land Board has confirmed, land is surveyed and a land title issued.\nThe system has also been exploited by refugees, especially those of the 1959 caseload\nwho have acquired land tittles [4] on settlement land. For instance, there is a case of a\nRwandan refugee with a title for seven square kilometres of settlement land.\nInterestingly, it was also found out that the camp commandant of Nakivale refugee\nsettlement has had to appear in court on charges of distributing land to refugees in the\nsettlement [5] .\n\n\nFurthermore, there have also been disagreements between Mbarara district\nadministration officials and the government over land in refugee settlements. Part of\nthe disagreements are because the government has refused nationals to use refugee\nland. One district official interviewed said that government has not always agreed\nwith the district on matters pertaining to land conflicts in refugee settlement. The\nfindings of the study revealed that in fact, some of the district officials are themselves\nencroachers on settlement land. Institutional responses are further hindered by\nmigration of nationals from other areas, such as Nyabushozi and Bushenyi, because of\nland shortages. This migration is caused by anticipation that refugees will repatriate\n\n2 The settlement boundary was determined by ridges that surround it.\n3 These were the original owners of the land in Nakivale and Oruchinga before government gazetted\nthe settlement.\n4 Under the Ugandan law, refugees are not supposed to own land.\n5 Interviews camp commandant Nakivale and Refugee Desk officer Mbarara, October 2004.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "especially to Rwanda and leave vacant land in the settlements. On the other hand,\nrefugees from Rwanda are coming to Uganda because there is land for settlement\n(Bagenda et al, 2002). In response, government is in the process of resurveying the\nland and cancelling all land titles acquired on refugee land.\n\n\nTo further analyze the land conflicts, one also needs to understand the land problem in\nRwanda. According to Hajabakiga (2004:1-3) Rwanda has a population of 8.1 million\nand a population density of 308 inhabitants per square kilometre. On a whole, this\nplaces pressure on land leading to landlessness. Limited access to land in Rwanda has\nalso had an influence on the repatriation of Rwandese in that they prefer to stay in\nareas where they have access to land for their own livelihoods. For instance, it is this\nlack of land in Rwanda that has partly led to secondary refugee movements from\nTanzania to Uganda.\n\n\nEven some of the refugees who had repatriated after the genocide in 1994 returned to\nUganda to repossess their land holdings in refugee settlements. When asked about\ntheir repatriation, Rwandan refugees indicated that they had no land to return to in\nRwanda [6] . Indeed, Hajabakiga (2004) observed that between the 1950s and 1980s\nmany people in Rwanda lost their land rights for politically and ethnically motivated\nreasons. This, according to her, caused a problem when Rwandese repatriated after\n1994 since they had no lands to repossess, and some of them ended up taking up the\nlands of those who had fled that same year.\n\n\nGenerally, conflicts over land in Nakivale can be perceived as \u2018livelihood clashes\u2019\nbetween refugees and nationals, since land is a critical resource for supporting\nlivelihoods (Mugerwa, 1992, Verma, 2001:79). Hence it is important to understand\nthe interplay of various factors that influence access to and utilisation of land by both\nhost communities and refugees. For instance, despite settlement size, each refugee\nhousehold is given 0.04 hectares (20m x 20m) of land for homestead establishment\nand 0.15 as agricultural plots. This leaves a large part of the land under\u2013utilized\nproviding room for encroachment by nationals in need of grazing land.\n\n\nQuite often, animals stray into refugees\u2019 agricultural plots leading to a conflict\nbetween refugees and local populations. Usually, conflicts arise when livelihoods are\nthreatened and this threat can be internal (within the households or communities) or\nexternal-from outside the households or communities (Mugerwa, 1992:23; Verma,\n2001:97). At the centre of land conflicts are questions of ownership, access to and\ncontrol over natural resources. Land is regarded by locals as belonging to Ugandans\nwith refugees having no rights whatsoever. Regarding their interests in land, locals\naccuse the government of placing refugees\u2019 above those of the national population [7] .\nFor refugees, access is determined by legislation, as land is allocated for a settlement.\nParadoxically, settlements are sometimes established in non-agricultural productive\nareas, limiting livelihood opportunities. Furthermore, the government confines the\nrefugees in the settlement, allowing them only limited freedom of movement.\nRefugees have had to devise survival strategies such as spontaneous movement out of\nsettlements with no permission to do so.\n\n\n6\nFc Group Discussion Kigali zone, Nakivale (July 2004).\n7 Refugee Desk Officer, Mbarara October 2004.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_Women\u2019s livelihood strategies_\n\n\nAccording to DFID (2001), a livelihood comprises the capabilities and assets (both\nmaterial and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A\nlivelihood is said to be sustainable when it can recover from shocks, stresses and\ntrends and maintain and enhance its capabilities both now and in the future while not\nundermining the natural resource base for future generations (Ibid).\n\n\nAccess to and control of land to a greater extent determines refugee women\u2019s access\nto livelihood assets such as physical capital, natural capital, human capital, financial\ncapital and social capital. Unfortunately, as Wengi (1998) points out, access and\ncontrol are limited by their lack of resource rights. For instance, in most of Sub\nSaharan Africa, women do not own land and even what they produce on the land, is\ncontrolled by the men (World Bank, 2000; Verma, 2001). Paradoxically, women\nthrough their labour are the major contributors to household livelihoods especially in\nrefugee situations (Mulumba, 2002).\n\n\nWomen and men negotiate access and maintain control over land as a productive and\nmaterial resource differently and inequitably within local relations of power (Verma,\n2001:79).Land conflicts influence women\u2019s access to resources such as cultivable\nland, water and firewood. Given their domestic responsibilities, refugee women\nnegotiate access to natural resources such as land for cultivation, firewood and water\nvital for the survival of their families.\n\n\nBecause of land conflicts and depletion of resources such as trees and arable soils\nwomen have been forced to look beyond the settlement for other sources. For\ninstance, interviews with refugee women revealed that they collect firewood and\nwater five to seven kilometres away from the settlement. Travelling such long\ndistances makes them vulnerable to sexual exploitation and gender based violence\nfrom both refugees and host populations. The distances also take away their valuable\ntime to engage in income generating activities or to participate in skills training.\n\n\nIt was also established that women do not control proceeds from surplus food sold in\nthe markets nor independently use the surplus from other household income\ngenerating activities. As a result, they are dependent on men for their daily needs a\nfact that greatly disadvantages them. For instance, because of their low income,\nwomen are denied access to dispute settling mechanisms in the settlements. For\nexample in the case of land conflicts, Refugee Welfare Committees [8] demand fees\nbefore they can settle a dispute.\n\n\nAccording to the Refugee Welfare Committee chairman, this is to \u2018facilitate\u2019 their\nwork in settling cases in the form of stationary. This requirement has become a\nhindrance to women who wish to seek assistance and adjudication of their cases.\nFurther to that, at times, police posts in the settlements also demand money from\nrefugees to address their complaints. For instance in cases where women report cases\nof sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), the police request \u2018fees\u2019 to arrest\n\n\n8 Refugee Welfare Committees are not facilitated by the government or UNHCR to carry out their day\nto day activities.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "perpetrators [9] . Since women often lack money to pay such fees, they at times fail to\nreport cases.\n\n\nRefuge women\u2019s vulnerability is also partly due to men who migrate out of the\nsettlements to seek for work opportunities in urban centres leaving their wives behind\nto maintain a presence in the settlement. As observed in a study of urban refugees in\nKampala (Kalyango, 1999) some refugees have ended up with a dual settlement, that\nis, some live in urban centres such as Mbarara and Kampala and only return to the\nsettlement when there is food distribution or a census.\n\n\nThe majority of refugee women respond to these hindrances in their attempts to\nestablish a livelihood by building up their social capital. For instance, they respond to\nthe lack of labour in the households as a consequence of the absence of men, by\nforming groups through which they harness their joint labour. Women for example\ncooperate in cultivating each other\u2019s gardens as a group. They also participate in\ncommunity activities such as women\u2019s groups, or as volunteers with humanitarian\nagencies operating in the settlement.\n\n\nSome refugee women work as social workers for the Uganda Red Cross Society or as\nCommunity Volunteers for the International Medial Corps (IMC). Social capital is\ndeveloped through vertical (patron/ client) or horizontal (between individuals with\nshared interests) networks that increase people\u2019s trust and ability to work together and\nexpand their access to wider institutions (DFID, 2001). Social capital helps to increase\nwomen\u2019s productivity, improves their access to income generating activities and\nfacilitates the sharing of knowledge (Ibid.).\n\n\nFurthermore, some women have devised survival strategies such as the use of sex and\nmarriage to achieve livelihood goals. For instance, they either exchange sex for\nservices they need or engage in outright prostitution. Joseph (not real name), who runs\na drug shop in the settlement, revealed that at times women request to exchange sex\nfor drugs in case they have no money.\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy of women is that of marriage as agency to access\nlivelihood resources. Women seek marriage [10] to either nationals or refugee men. In\nthe absence of role models and evident benefits from formal education, marriage has\nremained as the only option for many. Girls are married off as early as 16 years to\nacquire income or dowry and or extra labour for the household. Refugees reported\nthat if a girl reaches puberty then she is ready for marriage as in the case of Esther:\n\n\nEsther lost her husband in 1994 in Rwanda while fleeing the genocide\nwith her under-aged daughter Doris. When she arrived in Nakivale\nrefugee settlement, she got involved with a Rwandan man in order to\nsecure social support and survival. She gave away Doris to another man\nto marry her. The man was later arrested for defilement which is illegal\nin Uganda after a marriage ceremony attended by the Refugee Welfare\nCommittee members. Doris\u2019s mother refused to give evidence against her\nson-in-law arguing that Doris was of age and that the man had been\nwrongly arrested.\n\n\n9 The request for fees arises out of the poor facilitation of the police units in the settlements.\n10 At times they cohabit with men with no formal marriage ceremonies.\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Early marriages arise out of the communities\u2019 view that women\u2019s place in society is in\nthe home (Obbo, 1990:210). Early marriages however have a negative impact on\ngirls\u2019 access to education and building up their human capital. Human capital\nrepresents the skills, knowledge, ability, labour and good health that together enable\npeople to pursue different livelihood strategies and achieve their livelihood objectives\n(DFID, 2001).\n\n\nThe study concurs with the World Bank (2000:152) which observed that when girls\nreach adolescence, they are generally expected to spend more time on household\nactivities such as cooking, cleaning, collecting fuel and water and caring for children.\nMoreover, quite often men marry young girls not for companionship but as extra\nlabourers in households.\n\n\nSuch attitudes have partly led to high school drop out rate for girls in higher classes\n(secondary school level) despite high enrolment rates in lower classes (primary school\nlevel). Education policies have emphasised the enrolment of girls in both primary and\nsecondary school and not their retention in school. Whereas girls are encouraged to\nattend school, nothing much has been done to provide an enabling environment for\ntheir retention in school. According to the Government of Uganda\u2019s Development\nAssistance for Refugees (DAR) policy, refugees need more education facilities to\nensure that children are able to access primary education (GoU, 2004:12).\n\n\nA closer look at the government strategy shows that it does not address the quality of\neducation and the retention of the girl child in school. For instance, in one of the\nsecondary schools in the settlement, of the 300 students, 200 are boys and 100 are\ngirls. The head teacher said that girls have a high drop out rate because of early\nmarriages, pregnancy and neglect of parents. Mulumba (1998:35-40) noted that there\nis little motivation to educate daughters and further observed that in the refugee\nsettlements, it is not uncommon for girls as young as 13 and 14 years to marry.\n\n\nA limited number of women are involved in the informal sector within the settlement\ninstead of only relying on land resources. Some women operate kiosks that sell basic\nnecessities such as sugar, salt, paraffin; others provide services operating hair saloons\nand restaurants. This concurs with research by Deepa Narayan (2000:45), who\nobserved that poor people try to diversify their sources of income and food by\ncarrying out different income generating activities.\n\n\nDespite their hard work, it was found that women rarely participate in decisionmaking processes at both the household and community level. This is a result of\ncultural expectations that perceive women as belonging to the \u2018home\u2019 (Tinker,\n1990:17) and their preoccupation in care activities that limit their time to actively\nparticipate in decision-making.\n\n\nRefugee women with some form of formal education seek employment in the\nsettlements, although the opportunities are limited. A few semi-skilled women are\nemployed as social workers, community volunteers, teachers or midwives in the\nhealth units. In all these activities, they earn incentives that are not commensurate to\nthe work they do, as according to the government of Uganda, refugees are not\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "supposed to work. Hence, humanitarian agencies cannot sign a contract with them,\ngive them terms of reference and pay them a salary [11] .\n\n\nAnother livelihood strategy is that of engaging in Functional Adult Literacy (FAL)\nprograms. The majority of the refugees who attend these classes seek to learn English\nin order to improve their (economic and social) integration into the Ugandan\ncommunity.\n\n\nIt is also a strategy of those who hope to be resettled in other countries such as the\nUnited States of America, Australia and Canada. Enrolment in English language\nclasses reveals that refugee women have a long-term view of their livelihood beyond\nthe parameters of their households and domestic work. Whereas they thus search for\nopportunities that can get them and their families out of poverty, at the same time it is\nimportant to realize that they are constrained by having to juggle their studying with\ncare and livelihood activities in the households.\n\n\n**Conclusion**\n\n\nIn all, conflicts over land between refugees and host populations have had negative\nimpact on the way refugee women access livelihood goals. Land, for the majority of\nrefugee women is central to their survival. In order to overcome the predicaments of\nland conflicts and inequitable access to resources, refugee women have devised other\nlivelihood strategies to ensure their survival and that of their children. For instance\nmarriage, Functional Adult Literacy and building up of their social capital are seen as\nagency in this regard.\n\n\nThe extent to which refugee women can attain livelihood goals is however limited by\nrestrictions on their freedom of movement. As a result, refugees fail to fully utilize\nlivelihood opportunities even when they sneak out of the settlement. Ideally, for a way\nforward, refugees should be given an opportunity to build their livelihoods outside the\nframework of the settlement approach which is prone to conflicts with the local\npopulation and greatly limits achievement of sustainable livelihoods.\n\n\n11 Interview with program officer, Uganda Red Cross October 2004\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/25fc0094-24f1-3263-899c-cd26c916fb9d/0076AAD88CE65B2AC12571B900320D05-unhcr-uga-28jul.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_10/raw/doc_10_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,142 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "# SER UNA PERSONA REFUGIADA EN PANAM\u00c1\n\nDiagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n\n**Ser una persona refugiada en Panam\u00e1**\n**Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015**\n\n\n**Producci\u00f3n de dise\u00f1o:**\nLegacy Comunicaci\u00f3n Educativa\n\n\n_Las fotos de este documento son de autor\u00eda_\n_del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas_\n_para los Refugiados (ACNUR)_\n\n\nAlto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas\npara los Refugiados (ACNUR)\nRepresentaci\u00f3n Regional para\nAm\u00e9rica Central, Cuba y M\u00e9xico.\n\n\nCiudad del Saber, Clayton\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1\nTel.: +507 317-1723\nFax: +507 317-1715\nwww.acnur.org\nwww.unhcr.org\n\n\n\n**Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas**\n**para los Refugiados**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Junio 2015\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### _Agradecimiento_\n\ns fundamental mencionar que esta consulta fue posible gracias a la valiosa colaboraci\u00f3n\n###### E\nde un gran n\u00famero de organismos y personas. La oficina del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 expresa su\nagradecimiento especialmente a las personas refugiadas y solicitantes de asilo, los organismos\nde Estado: la Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n a Refugiados (ONPAR) y el Instituto Nacional\nde la Mujer (INAMU), y las organizaciones no gubernamentales: Cruz Roja Paname\u00f1a, Consejo\nNoruego para Refugiados, HIAS, la Pastoral de Movilidad Humana, el Servicio Jesuita para\nRefugiados y Refugee Education Trust (RET), por participar en el desarrollo de este informe\nproporcionando su tiempo y sus enriquecedoras experiencias para orientar este trabajo. Su\nasistencia ha sido sumamente relevante para el desarrollo de este ejercicio.\n\n\nPor cuarta vez en Panam\u00e1, ACNUR realiza el proceso de consulta de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada,\ndenominado Diagnostico Participativo. El diagnostico participativo consiste en un proceso de\ndialogo estructurado con grupos de mujeres, ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os, adolescentes y hombres con el fin de\nrecopilar informaci\u00f3n precisa sobre los problemas de protecci\u00f3n a los que se enfrenta la poblaci\u00f3n\nrefugiada y solicitante de asilo permitiendo la comprensi\u00f3n m\u00e1s profunda de los riesgos que\ncorren, los obst\u00e1culos que deben sobrepasar y las soluciones que proponen para su bienestar.\n\n\n**ACNUR 2015**\n\n\n#### PRESENTACI\u00d3N\n\nLa Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) actuando\nbajo la autoridad de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, tiene el mandato de proporcionar\nprotecci\u00f3n internacional a las personas refugiadas, as\u00ed como buscar soluciones duraderas a las\nsituaciones que enfrentan.\n\n\nEn Panam\u00e1, el ACNUR trabaja en estrecha coordinaci\u00f3n con el Estado y la sociedad civil para\ngarantizar la protecci\u00f3n internacional de todas las personas refugiadas que residen en el territorio\ndel pa\u00eds, as\u00ed como aquellas que solicitan el reconocimiento de su condici\u00f3n como refugiadas. La\noficina realiza acciones a fin de asegurar el acceso y el disfrute de los derechos de mujeres, hombres,\nni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes del inter\u00e9s del ACNUR.\n\n\nEl ACNUR coordina esfuerzos con la Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n a Refugiados (ONPAR),\nla instituci\u00f3n gubernamental que tiene un papel fundamental en el procedimiento de determinaci\u00f3n\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, junto con la Comisi\u00f3n Nacional de Protecci\u00f3n para Refugiados. Con el\nmismo objetivo, el ACNUR coordina esfuerzos con instituciones nacionales incluyendo el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n, la Secretar\u00eda Nacional de Ni\u00f1ez, Adolescencia y Familia (SENNIAF), el\nServicio Nacional de Fronteras (SENAFRONT), el Instituto Nacional para la Mujer (INAMU) y la\nDefensor\u00eda del Pueblo. Adem\u00e1s el ACNUR trabaja en colaboraci\u00f3n con organizaciones de la sociedad\ncivil incluyendo a la Pastoral de Movilidad Humana, la Cruz Roja Paname\u00f1a y el Consejo Noruego\npara Refugiados, HIAS, Refugee Education Trust (RET) y Servicio Jesuita para Refugiados (SJR).\n\n\nDebido a la posici\u00f3n geogr\u00e1fica de Panam\u00e1, el pa\u00eds se constituye en un lugar de paso para\nmovimientos migratorios mixtos, entre los cuales se encuentran personas con necesidad de\nprotecci\u00f3n internacional. La mayor\u00eda de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en Panam\u00e1 viene de pa\u00edses de la\nregi\u00f3n, como Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela y, en menor escala, de pa\u00edses del Tri\u00e1ngulo Norte de\nCentroam\u00e9rica. Aproximadamente el 87% de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada vive en \u00e1reas urbanas, como\nson el Distrito de Panama, San Miguelito, Arraij\u00e1n y la Chorrera. Debido a la perspectiva a trav\u00e9s de\nla cual se entiende la migraci\u00f3n en la regi\u00f3n, la integraci\u00f3n local de los refugiados y solicitantes de\nla condici\u00f3n de refugiado se dificulta debido al desconocimiento de la poblaci\u00f3n en general sobre\ntemas relacionados a los refugiados y a los motivos de salida de sus pa\u00edses de origen.\n\n\nEn este contexto, el trabajo del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 se enfoca en dos \u00e1reas: el fortalecimiento\ndel sistema de asilo en un marco de respeto al debido proceso y el acceso a derechos por parte de\nla poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, que permite de esa manera su\nintegraci\u00f3n local.\n\n\nEl Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo del ACNUR, realizado con poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en \u00e1reas urbanas y\nrurales, tiene como objetivo entender mejor los retos, las dificultades, los desaf\u00edos y las oportunidades\ndesde su llegada al pa\u00eds hasta el momento en que se integran definitivamente a la sociedad paname\u00f1a\na trav\u00e9s de la naturalizaci\u00f3n. Para el ACNUR, el acceso a derechos es lo que permite que las personas\nque han salido de sus pa\u00edses por temor fundado de persecuci\u00f3n reciban protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\n\n6 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Un tema de vital importancia en la protecci\u00f3n internacional, que es abordado en este documento,\nes el acceso al territorio y al procedimiento de la determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado. Es\nnecesario que las autoridades tomen las acciones necesarias para salvaguardar las garant\u00edas del debido\nproceso en todas las etapas incluyendo desde la llegada al territorio hasta la decisi\u00f3n final por la que se\nreconoce o no la condici\u00f3n de refugiado de las personas solicitantes.\n\n\nEn 2014, se celebr\u00f3 el trig\u00e9simo aniversario de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Cartagena donde los gobiernos, la\nsociedad civil y el ACNUR se reunieron para reflexionar y buscar respuestas concretas a la protecci\u00f3n\ninternacional de refugiados, solicitantes, ap\u00e1tridas y otras personas de inter\u00e9s del ACNUR. El proceso\nconmemorativo culmin\u00f3 con la adopci\u00f3n de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Brasil en diciembre 2014.\n\n\nEn esta Declaraci\u00f3n, se contempla el Programa \u201cAsilo de Calidad\u201d que es facilitado por el ACNUR\nen pa\u00edses de la regi\u00f3n, incluido Panam\u00e1, con el objetivo de mejorar los procedimientos de elegibilidad,\nfortalecer la capacidad y el conocimiento de las autoridades del asilo, e introducir conceptos eficientes\nde gesti\u00f3n y manejo de procedimientos. La implementaci\u00f3n del programa \u201cAsilo de Calidad\u201d permitir\u00e1\ngarantizar el acceso efectivo al procedimiento de la determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, el\nrespeto al principio de no devoluci\u00f3n, el principio de confidencialidad y otros.\n\n\nLas soluciones duraderas para los refugiados en el acceso a sus derechos se constituyen en un\npaso importante para que logren integrarse efectivamente en la sociedad paname\u00f1a; sin embargo,\nrepresenta mayores retos. Los refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado en Panam\u00e1 se\nenfrentan a varias dificultades en el acceso a los derechos humanos m\u00e1s b\u00e1sicos, como el derecho al\ntrabajo, a la educaci\u00f3n, a la vivienda y a la salud. La falta de acceso a sus derechos conlleva una serie\nconsecuencias para la integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\nen Panam\u00e1. Para que la integraci\u00f3n local sea efectiva es necesario contar con pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas y con\nmarcos legales y econ\u00f3micos apropiados que promuevan esta soluci\u00f3n duradera.\n\n\nEl ACNUR reitera su compromiso en la protecci\u00f3n de refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de\nrefugiado en Panam\u00e1, as\u00ed como su compromiso en la b\u00fasqueda de soluciones duraderas que tengan en\ncuenta sus derechos y la diversidad que caracteriza a esta poblaci\u00f3n.\n\nEl ACNUR espera que este Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo sea un medio para generar conciencia sobre\nla realidad de los refugiados en Panam\u00e1 y en el mundo, as\u00ed como en la importancia de contribuir en\nla b\u00fasqueda de soluciones y respuestas integrales, coordinadas y efectivas con miras a asegurar que\naquellas personas que necesiten protecci\u00f3n puedan acceder a ella de forma efectiva y de acuerdo a los\nprincipios y est\u00e1ndares internacionales.\n\n\n**Fernando Protti Alvarado**\n_Representante Regional del Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas_\n_para los Refugiados en Am\u00e9rica Central, Cuba y M\u00e9xico_\nPanam\u00e1, junio 2015\n\n\n#### PREFACIO ONPAR\n\nLa Oficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n de Refugiados (ONPAR), dependencia del Ministerio de\nGobierno dirigido por su Excelencia Milton Henr\u00edquez - Ministro de Gobierno, y su Excelencia\nMar\u00eda Luisa Romero \u2013 Viceministra de Gobierno, con el prop\u00f3sito de cumplir con las obligaciones\ninternacionales y con el Plan de Gobierno propuesto por su Excelencia Juan Carlos Varela \u2013\nPresidente de la Rep\u00fablica de Panam\u00e1, tiene dentro de sus objetivos espec\u00edficos el promover\nel respeto de los Derechos de los solicitantes, refugiados, y su n\u00facleo familiar; garantizarle un\nprocedimiento adecuado y eficaz, con el prop\u00f3sito de que puedan acceder a todos los servicios que\nbrinda actualmente ONPAR, y as\u00ed obtener una adecuada coordinaci\u00f3n, planificaci\u00f3n y ejecuci\u00f3n de\nlas decisiones que tome la Comisi\u00f3n Nacional para la Protecci\u00f3n de Refugiados, que es la entidad\nque en nuestro pa\u00eds decide acerca del otorgamiento del estatuto de refugiado.\n\n\nDesde el mes de julio del a\u00f1o 2014 cuando asum\u00ed la direcci\u00f3n de la Oficina Nacional para la\natenci\u00f3n de Refugiados (ONPAR), nos planteamos un plan de trabajo con metas a corto, mediano\ny largo plazo, algunas de las cuales ya hemos cumplido y se han traducido en cambios sustanciales\nen el funcionamiento de ONPAR, y en el mejoramiento del servicio que prestamos. Entre ellos\npodemos mencionar el fortalecimiento del procedimiento para la determinaci\u00f3n del estatuto de\nrefugiado, implementando de manera inmediata las recomendaciones, proyecto que llevamos a\ncabo en conjunto con ACNUR, un mejor control en las entradas de las solicitudes, estad\u00edsticas,\nseguimientos, digitalizaci\u00f3n, entre otros, implementando la Base de Datos donada, la incorporaci\u00f3n\nde investigaciones de contexto en el an\u00e1lisis de las solicitudes y el mejoramiento en la estructura y\nan\u00e1lisis de los informes presentados a la Comisi\u00f3n, capacitaciones para los colaboradores con el\napoyo de organizaciones de la sociedad civil y de ACNUR, la incorporaci\u00f3n de los ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes al proceso de determinaci\u00f3n del estatuto de refugiados con la asistencia de un equipo\ninterdisciplinario (Trabajadora Social, Psic\u00f3logo, y Abogado). Adem\u00e1s, nuestro pa\u00eds particip\u00f3 en la\nadopci\u00f3n del \u201cPlan de Acci\u00f3n de Brasil\u201d, el cual fija una ruta com\u00fan para la regi\u00f3n con el prop\u00f3sito de\nfortalecer la Protecci\u00f3n y Promover soluciones sostenibles para las personas refugiadas, desplazadas\ny personas que carecen de nacionalidad denominados Ap\u00e1tridas. Sin embargo, a\u00fan tenemos algunas\nmetas pendientes, dentro de las cuales podemos mencionar: coordinar la adopci\u00f3n de medidas para\nfacilitar la integraci\u00f3n de las personas solicitantes de refugio y refugiadas a la sociedad paname\u00f1a,\nlo que implica que entre otras cosas estas tengan acceso al trabajo, la educaci\u00f3n, entre otros, mejorar\nla calidad de la metodolog\u00eda de entrevista, as\u00ed como las condiciones de privacidad en las que estas\nson realizadas, coordinar la elaboraci\u00f3n de un Protocolo de Atenci\u00f3n para los Ni\u00f1os, Ni\u00f1as y\nAdolescentes Refugiados, evaluar el borrador de la Ley de Apatridia, con el fin de que nuestro pa\u00eds\nadopte un procedimiento para la determinaci\u00f3n de la apatridia, y presentar las modificaciones del\nDecreto Ejecutivo N\u00b0 23, entre otros. Sin embargo, s\u00f3lo ser\u00e1 posible cumplir estas metas que nos\nhemos trazado contando con la colaboraci\u00f3n de las instituciones estatales responsables de algunos\nde los temas mencionados, pero tambi\u00e9n de ACNUR y las organizaciones de la sociedad civil.\n\n\n**Yaribeth de Calvo**\nDirectora Nacional\nOficina Nacional para la Atenci\u00f3n de Refugiados\nMinisterio de Gobierno\n\n\n\n8 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "REFUGIADO(A)\nUn refugiado es una persona\nque, debido a fundados temores de\nser perseguida por motivos de raza,\nreligi\u00f3n, nacionalidad, pertenencia a un\ndeterminado grupo social u opiniones\npol\u00edticas, se encuentra fuera de su pa\u00eds\nde nacionalidad y no puede o, a causa\nde dichos temores, no quiere acogerse a\nla protecci\u00f3n de tal pa\u00eds. _Convenci\u00f3n_\n_de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Estatuto_\n_de los Refugiados (1951), Art\u00edculo 1._\nSOLICITANTES DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N\nDE REFUGIADO (SOLICITANTES DE ASILO)\nSolicitante de asilo es quien solicita\nel reconocimiento de la condici\u00f3n de\nrefugiado y cuya solicitud todav\u00eda no ha\nsido evaluada en forma definitiva.\n\n\n\nESTATUTO HUMANITARIO PROVISIONAL\nDE PROTECCI\u00d3N (PTH)\nEs un estatuto de protecci\u00f3n\nconcedido de forma temporal por\nel Gobierno de Panam\u00e1 en caso de\nafluencia a gran escala de personas que\nbuscan protecci\u00f3n dentro del territorio.\nLos beneficiarios del Estatuto\nHumanitario Provisional de Protecci\u00f3n,\ntambi\u00e9n conocido como PTH, no gozan\nde los mismos derechos y beneficios\nlegales y sociales de aquellas personas\nreconocidas formalmente como\nRefugiados entre ellas la libertad\nde movimiento y el derecho a un\npermiso de trabajo.\n_Decreto Ejecutivo N\u00b023 de febrero_\n_de 1998, Titulo II._\n\n\n\nSOCIOS IMPLEMENTADORES\nY OPERACIONALES\nLos socios implementadores son\naquellas organizaciones a las cuales el\nACNUR conf\u00eda la ejecuci\u00f3n\nde proyectos y recursos dirigidos\na la asistencia humanitaria\nde refugiados y solicitantes de asilo\nen el pa\u00eds siguiendo un documento\ncontractual que formaliza la relaci\u00f3n\nentre ambas organizaciones. Mientras\nque un socio operacional es aquella\norganizaci\u00f3n que dirige proyectos\npropios y complementa la asistencia\ndirigida a personas refugiadas y\nsolicitante de asilo sin manejar\nde manera directa recursos\nproporcionados por el ACNUR.\n\n\n\nLA OFICINA NACIONAL PARA LA ATENCI\u00d3N\nDE REFUGIADOS (ONPAR)\nONPAR, una oficina adscrita al\nMinisterio de Gobierno, fue creada\na trav\u00e9s del Decreto Ejecutivo N\u00b023 del\n10 de febrero de 1998 con el fin\nde coordinar y ejecutar los\nprogramas de atenci\u00f3n y protecci\u00f3n a\nlos Refugiados en Panam\u00e1, adem\u00e1s\nde las decisiones adoptadas por\nla Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad.\nEn Panam\u00e1, ONPAR es la oficina\nencargada de procesar las solicitudes\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\ny dem\u00e1s tr\u00e1mites administrativos\nrelacionados al proceso, por ejemplo\nla renovaci\u00f3n de los documentos\nde identidad.\n\n\n\nCOMISI\u00d3N NACIONAL DE PROTECCI\u00d3N PARA\nREFUGIADOS (COMISI\u00d3N DE ELEGIBILIDAD)\nLa Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad,\nestablecida seg\u00fan el Decreto Ejecutivo\nN\u00b0 23 de 1998, tiene como mandato\naplicar las disposiciones\nde la Convenci\u00f3n de 1951 sobre\nel Estatuto de los Refugiados\ny su Protocolo de 1967, as\u00ed como\ncualquier otra norma, acuerdo o\ndisposici\u00f3n de legislaci\u00f3n interna,\nrelativa al reconocimiento, protecci\u00f3n y\nasistencia de los refugiados.\nLa funci\u00f3n principal de la Comisi\u00f3n de\nElegibilidad es la evaluaci\u00f3n\nde las solicitudes presentadas ante\nONPAR para el reconocimiento\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado.\n\n\n\nAUTORIDADES RECEPTORAS PRIMARIAS\nLa autoridad receptora primaria\nes un t\u00e9rmino utilizado para identificar\na cualquier funcionario que reciba en\nprimera instancia al solicitante de asilo.\nEsta autoridad u oficina de gobierno tiene\nla responsabilidad, seg\u00fan el articulo 28 del\nDecreto Ejecutivo N\u00b0 23 de 1998,\nde notificar a la ONPAR la llegada de un\nsolicitante de asilo refiriendo a la persona\npara el inicio de su tr\u00e1mite. A nivel pr\u00e1ctico\nlas autoridades receptoras en Panam\u00e1\nincluyen al Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n\n(SNM), el Servicio Nacional de Fronteras\n(SENAFRONT), el Servicio Aero Naval\n(SENAN) y la Polic\u00eda Nacional, aunque\ncualquier otra autoridad que identifique\nun caso tiene la misma responsabilidad\nde referir, en un t\u00e9rmino no mayor de 24\nhoras, el caso a la ONPAR.\n\n\n\n10 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Sistema de determinaci\u00f3n de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, documentaci\u00f3n y cambio de condici\u00f3n migratorio\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\n\n\nLa Oficina del ACNUR en Panam\u00e1 contin\u00faa brindando el\napoyo t\u00e9cnico al Estado paname\u00f1o para fortalecer el sistema\nde reconocimiento de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, esto apunta\na un mejoramiento continuo desde el acceso al territorio de\nun solicitantes de asilo hasta garantizar un recurso efectivo\nde apelaci\u00f3n, de acuerdo a los est\u00e1ndares de protecci\u00f3n de\ninstrumentos de derecho internacional y regional.\n\n\nPROCEDIMIENTO PARA EL RECONOCIMIENTO DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N DE REFUGIADO\n\n\nSeg\u00fan cifras de ONPAR 1,184 personas solicitaron la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado o asilo durante el 2014. Asimismo,\nestad\u00edsticas brindadas por la ONPAR indican que 297\nsolicitudes fueron analizadas por esta instituci\u00f3n durante el\na\u00f1o 2014. De \u00e9stas, 76 resoluciones de admisibilidad y 226\nresoluciones de no admisibilidad. Con base a estas cifras, se\npuede inferir que solo un 26% de las solicitudes analizadas\ndurante el pasado a\u00f1o, fueron puestas en conocimiento de\nla Comisi\u00f3n de elegibilidad, en adelante Comisi\u00f3n, para su\nreconocimiento o no como refugiado. Asi mismo, ACNUR\ncalcula que s\u00f3lo un 12% de los solicitantes son reconocidos\ncomo refugiados.\n\n\nDe acuerdo a registros del ACNUR, existen\naproximadamente 2,000 solicitudes pendientes de an\u00e1lisis\ntanto de la ONPAR como de la Comisi\u00f3n. \u00c9sta cifra\nacumulada de solicitudes puede responder a varios factores\ncomo por ejemplo: (1) el contraste entre el n\u00famero de\npersonas encargadas de analizar las solicitudes en ONPAR\nversus el n\u00famero de solicitantes de asilo; (2) el n\u00famero de\ninstancias en que la Comisi\u00f3n se re\u00fane durante el a\u00f1o.\n\n\nEstad\u00edsticas que apoyan la informaci\u00f3n brindada por\nsolicitantes de asilo durante los diversos diagn\u00f3sticos\nparticipativos identificando un proceso complejo y largo que\npuede durar hasta dos a\u00f1os.\n\nRespecto a la informaci\u00f3n disponible para los\nsolicitantes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, \u00e9stos manifestaron\nque desear\u00edan que hubiera m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n sobre el\nprocedimiento administrativo para reconocer su condici\u00f3n,\nen especial sobre sus deberes y derechos. En zonas rurales,\nla informaci\u00f3n sobre el procedimiento es a\u00fan m\u00e1s escasa,\nincluso para las propias autoridades receptoras. Asimismo,\nlos solicitantes cuyo idioma es distinto al espa\u00f1ol se\u00f1alaron\n\n\n\nEn el siguiente cap\u00edtulo esperamos enumerar los\ndiferentes riesgos de protecci\u00f3n identificados por la\npoblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de asilo en relaci\u00f3n a este\nprocedimiento, al igual que los importantes avances que se\nlograron en los \u00faltimos a\u00f1os en relaci\u00f3n a la regularizaci\u00f3n\nde la poblaci\u00f3n PTH y el establecimiento de un proceso\npermanente que permite la integraci\u00f3n legal en el pa\u00eds.\n\n\nla importancia de contar con informaci\u00f3n en otros idiomas\nadem\u00e1s del espa\u00f1ol.\n\nEn cuanto al acceso al territorio y al procedimiento, la\nmayor\u00eda de las solicitudes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado son\npresentadas directamente ante la ONPAR. Sin embargo, el\nacceso al territorio y al procedimiento de asilo puede no siempre\nocurrir en contextos donde los solicitantes tienen la posibilidad\nde aproximarse a las oficinas de la ONPAR. En ocasiones \u00e9stos\ningresan en contextos rurales como la Provincia de Dari\u00e9n\ndonde no hay presencia de la ONPAR de manera permanente\nincrementando el riesgo de rechazo o prohibici\u00f3n de ingreso\nen frontera.\n\nDe igual manera pueden solicitar la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\nestando en el albergue de migraci\u00f3n situaci\u00f3n que los pone en\nriesgo de no poder trasmitir su solicitud ante ONPAR. Estas\nsituaciones pueden agravarse para aquellas personas que son\nde otros continentes y que no hablan el idioma espa\u00f1ol.\n\n\nPara efectos de garantizar el acceso al territorio y al\nprocedimiento, se destaca la necesidad de crear un protocolo\npara la referencia de casos de solicitantes ante la ONPAR para\nreducir el riesgo de devoluci\u00f3n.\n\n\nPara tal fin, es preciso la participaci\u00f3n del Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n y el Servicio Nacional de Fronteras.\n\n\nDurante los \u00faltimos meses, se destaca un progreso en las\nresoluciones que emite la ONPAR, particularmente en la\nmotivaci\u00f3n, an\u00e1lisis y fundamentaci\u00f3n de sus decisiones de\nadmisibilidad al procedimiento. De esta manera, aquellos\nsolicitantes que no son admitidos a tr\u00e1mite pueden presentar\nun recurso de reconsideraci\u00f3n con mayor conocimiento de\nlas razones por las que fueron negadas sus solicitudes.\n\n\n\nDOCUMENTACI\u00d3N\n\n\nLa documentaci\u00f3n apropiada de los refugiados y solicitantes\ndisminuye el riesgo de detenci\u00f3n, protege de la devoluci\u00f3n y\nfacilita el acceso a servicios y derechos.\n\nEn los \u00faltimos a\u00f1os Panam\u00e1 ha tomado la iniciativa de\nexpedir carn\u00e9s de identidad a solicitantes de asilo en espera de\nsu admisi\u00f3n a tr\u00e1mite respondiendo a uno de los riesgos m\u00e1s\nsignificativos de pasados Diagn\u00f3sticos Participativos. En este\nsentido la poblaci\u00f3n solicitante ha calificado la medida como\nuna iniciativa justa, pero con necesidad de ser fortalecida\nidentific\u00e1ndose como problemas:\n\n\na) La vigencia temporal de los carn\u00e9s que no se ajusta a la\nrealidad del proceso, ya que la gesti\u00f3n para renovar el carn\u00e9\nde solicitante puede demorar meses y muchas veces son\naprehendidos por autoridades por estar indocumentados o\npor tener documentaci\u00f3n expirada,\n\n\nb) la falta de conocimiento de las autoridades (entidades de\nseguridad) sobre el estatuto de refugiado y la ONPAR, conducen\na una situaci\u00f3n que aumenta los riesgos de detenci\u00f3n o abuso al\nno reconocerse como documentos v\u00e1lidos. Las certificaciones\nprovisorias entregadas por ONPAR, de atrasarse el proceso de\nrenovaci\u00f3n o debido a problemas t\u00e9cnicos que no permitan\nla expedici\u00f3n de los carn\u00e9s tampoco protegen a las personas.\n\n\nLos atrasos en los procesos de renovaci\u00f3n de los\ndocumentos de identidad tambi\u00e9n afectan a los solicitantes\nde la condici\u00f3n de refugiado admitidos a tr\u00e1mite y a los\nrefugiados reconocidos, identific\u00e1ndose casos donde son\nsancionados por el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n con multas\npor no renovar sus carn\u00e9s a tiempo a pesar de haber solicitado\nante la ONPAR la renovaci\u00f3n con d\u00edas de anticipaci\u00f3n. En esta\nl\u00ednea la poblaci\u00f3n consultada ha reconocido las limitaciones\nde la ONPAR relacionadas a la falta de personal y al aumento\nde las solicitudes de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado, situaci\u00f3n que\n\n\n\nreconocen puede dificultar el procesamiento efectivo de\notras solicitudes administrativas como son: la renovaci\u00f3n\nde documentos de identidad, permisos de trabajo y\ncertificaciones. En este caso la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante\nde asilo ha identificado como una de las posibles soluciones\nla elaboraci\u00f3n de manuales internos, en ONPAR, donde se\nestablezca de manera clara los procedimientos y t\u00e9rminos\nde renovaci\u00f3n de los documentos buscando de esta manera\nel procesamiento ordenado, r\u00e1pido y justo de las solicitudes\nde renovaci\u00f3n.\n\nUna de las mayores inquietudes tanto de los solicitantes\ncomo de los refugiados, es el uso del t\u00e9rmino de \u201crefugiado\u201d en\ntodas las documentaciones que les son entregadas durante el\nprocedimiento, ya que creen que esta origina discriminaci\u00f3n\nal encontrarse con autoridades de polic\u00eda o incluso en la\nb\u00fasqueda de un trabajo.\n\n\nEn el caso de Dari\u00e9n, los refugiados reconocidos afrontan\nde igual manera dificultades al momento de renovar su\nidentificaci\u00f3n siendo la causa principal la falta de presencia de\nlas instituciones encargadas de la renovaci\u00f3n de documentos,\nespecialmente ONPAR, y la centralizaci\u00f3n del proceso\nde renovaci\u00f3n en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1. De forma que todo\ninteresado en tramitar un documento debe obligatoriamente\napersonarse a las oficinas centrales de ONPAR y el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n, respectivamente.\n\n\nA esto se le suma los altos costos de transporte para\nmovilizarse hasta la ciudad de Panam\u00e1, costos que por lo\ngeneral la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en la provincia de Dari\u00e9n no\npuede cubrir.\n\n\nEn temas de documentaci\u00f3n, el \u201cdocumento de viaje\u201d se\nmantiene como un pendiente, limitando las opciones de viaje\na refugiados que por raz\u00f3n de su temor no puedan obtener un\npasaporte de su pa\u00eds de origen.\n\n\n\n\n\n16 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "LA NATURALIZACI\u00d3N COMO \u00daNICA FORMA DE CULMINAR LA PROTECCI\u00d3N COMO PERSONA REFUGIADA\n\n\n\nPanam\u00e1 dio un gran paso en materia legislativa con la\naprobaci\u00f3n de la Ley 74 de 2013 que brinda la oportunidad\na los refugiados, previo cumplimiento de requisitos, de\nsolicitar la residencia permanente y obtener un permiso de\ntrabajo indefinido. Las personas refugiadas mencionaron\nque la residencia permanente abre las puertas a muchas\nm\u00e1s oportunidades de empleo y autosuficiencia en general.\nPrincipalmente, el permiso de trabajo indefinido les brinda\nmayor estabilidad laboral en sus respectivos oficios.\n\n\nNo obstante, es importante reconocer que la obtenci\u00f3n\nde la residencia permanente \u2013 en el caso de la Ley 74 - no\nculmina la protecci\u00f3n como persona refugiada. En este\nsentido, las personas refugiadas se\u00f1alaron que ciertas autoridades\nconsideran que ellos pierden la condici\u00f3n de refugiado una vez\nobtienen la residencia permanente. A este respecto, la legislaci\u00f3n\nde Panam\u00e1 es clara en confirmar que las personas que aplican a\nla ley 74 siguen siendo refugiados a pesar de contar con un carn\u00e9\nde residente permanente, aunque persiste la \u201cdesinformaci\u00f3n\u201d de\nacuerdo a los refugiados.\n\n\nAdicionalmente, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada manifest\u00f3 que le\ngustar\u00eda tener un mensaje uniforme de las autoridades sobre\nsi necesitan solicitar un permiso de salida para salir del pa\u00eds\ny regresar continuando con la protecci\u00f3n como persona\nrefugiada. En este caso la poblaci\u00f3n manifest\u00f3 su temor de\nviajar y perder su condici\u00f3n de refugiado(a).\n\n\nEn cuanto al procedimiento, para adquirir la residencia\npermanente, segun la Ley 74 de 2013, la poblaci\u00f3n consultada\nse\u00f1ala que el costo es exorbitante para un refugiado,\nprincipalmente en aquellos casos en d\u00f3nde hay m\u00e1s de un\nadulto en el grupo familiar. A manera de ejemplo, una familia\n\n\n\ncompuesta por dos adultos, estar\u00eda sujeta a pagar USD 65.00\nd\u00f3lares cada uno por el carn\u00e9 de residente permanente que\notorga el Tribunal Electoral de Panam\u00e1, m\u00e1s USD 100.00 d\u00f3lares\ncada uno por el permiso de trabajo indefinido lo que lleva a que\nsolo un adulto del grupo familiar, normalmente el esposo, inicie\nel tr\u00e1mite de residencia. Con una mirada al futuro, podr\u00eda ser\nnecesaria una adecuaci\u00f3n de los procesos de naturalizaci\u00f3n\npara la situaci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas.\n\n\nEn general, la provincia del Dari\u00e9n alberga a dos perfiles de\nrefugiados: refugiados reconocidos y poblaci\u00f3n ex-PTH.\n\n\nEn el caso de los refugiados reconocidos que pueden aplicar\na la Ley 74 de 2013, la situaci\u00f3n de renovaci\u00f3n y entrega de la\ndocumentaci\u00f3n es m\u00e1s complicada para aquellos refugiados que\nviven en comunidades aleda\u00f1as al Rio Tuira debido a la lejan\u00eda de\nlas comunidades, las dificultades y costos del transporte a Ciudad\nde Panam\u00e1 donde solo se puede hacer los tramites.\n\n\nDe acuerdo a estad\u00edsticas del ACNUR, existen 139 personas\nrefugiadas en Dari\u00e9n, que en principio podr\u00edan aplicar a la\nresidencia permanente pero a las que se le dificulta iniciar su\ntr\u00e1mite ya se por la lejan\u00eda de las comunidades, los altos costos de\ntransporte y gastos administrativos (costos de los carn\u00e9s) que no\npueden de forma realista cubrir.\n\n\nImplementar una coordinaci\u00f3n interinstitucional similar a\nla Ley 81 de 2011, cuando se organiz\u00f3 conjuntamente con todas\nlas organizaciones involucradas un plan de trabajos con fases\ny t\u00e9rminos de implementaci\u00f3n, facilitar\u00eda a los refugiados en\ncomunidades rurales aplicar a la residencia permanente poniendo\nfin a una de sus principales preocupaciones: la renovaci\u00f3n constante\nde sus documentos como refugiados (renovaci\u00f3n anual.)\n\n\n###### **Acceso a oportunidades de empleo,**\n#### servicios bancarios y educaci\u00f3n como v\u00edas de autosuficiencia\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nen la actualidad son varios los actores \u2013tanto de Estado como de\nsociedad civil \u2013 que sugieren emular buenas pr\u00e1cticas legislativas\nde pa\u00edses de la regi\u00f3n que brindan un permiso de trabajo\nprovisional a los solicitantes. Desde el enfoque de integraci\u00f3n\nlocal, el proceso de integraci\u00f3n econ\u00f3mico ser\u00eda m\u00e1s efectivo si la\npersonas comenzar\u00e1 a trabajar desde el inicio de su proceso ante la\nONPAR. Tomando en cuenta que el 87% de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada\nvive en zonas urbanas (Panam\u00e1, San Miguelito y Panam\u00e1 Oeste)\nsu integraci\u00f3n tiene mayores esperanzas en comparaci\u00f3n con la\npoblaci\u00f3n refugiada en comunidades fronterizas de la Provincia\nde Dari\u00e9n.\n\n\n\n\n\nLa Convenci\u00f3n de 1951 establece las cl\u00e1usulas correspondientes\na un empleo remunerado, trabajo por cuenta propia y profesiones\nliberales que deben ser aplicadas a las personas refugiadas. De\nigual manera, establece art\u00edculos relacionados al derecho de\nlas personas refugiada a acceder a la educaci\u00f3n. M\u00e1s all\u00e1 de la\nConvenci\u00f3n de 1951, existe un cuerpo de instrumentos de\nderecho internacional y regional que pueden ser aplicados a la\nprotecci\u00f3n de poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y que garantizan derechos.\n\n\nEn cuanto a las oportunidades de empleo, s\u00f3lo los refugiados\nreconocidos tienen derecho a un permiso de trabajo, renovable\ncada a\u00f1o de acuerdo a la legislaci\u00f3n de refugiados. Sin embargo,\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDiagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "ACCESO AL TRABAJO\n\n\nEl permiso de trabajo tiene dos aspectos que preocupan a\nlas personas refugiadas. Primero, el largo periodo que toma\nla renovaci\u00f3n del documento (hasta seis meses). Durante\neste tiempo de espera, ellos est\u00e1n expuestos a explotaci\u00f3n\nlaboral o pueden ser despedidos o hasta multados por no\ncontar con documentaci\u00f3n vigente.\n\n\nSegundo, el t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d impreso en los carn\u00e9s\npuede ser visto de manera negativa por algunos empleadores,\nya que desconocen sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado. Una\nsituaci\u00f3n que tambi\u00e9n afecta a los refugiados reconocidos\nque han iniciado su tr\u00e1mite de residencia permanente\na trav\u00e9s de la Ley 74 del 2013 y es que los permisos de\ntrabajo expedidos a trav\u00e9s de esta Ley especial tambi\u00e9n son\nexpedidos con el t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d.\n\n\nPor otro lado, los solicitantes pueden permanecer\nun promedio de uno a dos a\u00f1os en espera de su\nreconocimiento, y en ese lapso no cuentan con permiso\nde trabajo. En este sentido, los solicitantes se\u00f1alan que\nno pueden quedarse de manos cruzadas y buscan trabajos\ninformales en los cuales pueden ser v\u00edctimas de abuso y\nexplotaci\u00f3n laboral (jornadas de 12 horas, bajos salarios,\netc.) alejados de las prestaciones de seguridad social, sin\nacceso a cr\u00e9dito o expuestos a extorsiones y/o decomiso de\nmercader\u00edas, herramientas o implementos necesarios para\nsus actividades productivas.\n\n\n\ny solicitantes tienen acceso limitado o nulo a programas de\ncapacitaci\u00f3n t\u00e9cnica o desarrollo empresarial, como aquellos\nque ofrece la AMPYME o el INADEH dificult\u00e1ndose el acceso\na oportunidades educativas que podr\u00edan facilitar el desarrollo\nde proyectos productivos o la b\u00fasqueda de un medio\nde vida estable.\n\n\nEn Darien, en cambio las dificultades para acceder al\ntrabajo est\u00e1n relacionadas con las limitaciones propias del\ncontexto rural en el que viven entendi\u00e9ndose que la mayor\u00eda de\nla poblaci\u00f3n se dedica a la agricultura de supervivencia. Sin\nembargo, es importante mencionar que existe una serie de\nobst\u00e1culos que dificultan a\u00fan m\u00e1s la generaci\u00f3n de ingresos\nprincipalmente: a) los obst\u00e1culos para formalizar la propiedad\nde tierras, b) los altos costos de los permisos de pesca y\nlicencias mar\u00edtimas con precios exorbitantes para la poblaci\u00f3n\nde Dari\u00e9n, c) en ocasiones la falta de documentos de identidad\nque les limita su movimiento en la provincia, d) y hasta cierto\npunto los estrictos controles de seguridad en la Provincia\nlo que ha afectado el comercio binacional entre Colombia y\nPanam\u00e1 y el mercado local limitando a\u00fan m\u00e1s las opciones\nde trabajo.\n\n\nRefugiados con necesidades especiales, enfermedades\ncr\u00f3nicas o adultos mayores, tampoco cuentan con opciones\nrealistas para la generaci\u00f3n de ingresos en Dari\u00e9n, ya que\nestas se limitan a la agricultura y la pesca por lo que terminan\ndependiendo de la generosidad del resto de la comunidad,\nespecialmente si no cuentan con familiares. Una situaci\u00f3n que\nafecta tanto a poblaci\u00f3n refugiada como paname\u00f1a.\n\n\n###### **Acceso a vivienda, educaci\u00f3n,**\n## percepci\u00f3n de discriminaci\u00f3n y bienestar\n\nINTRODUCCI\u00d3N\n\n\n\ncamino largo donde se espera obtener protecci\u00f3n y poner fin\nal ciclo de desplazamiento al que se ve expuesta la\npersona siendo una de las \u201csoluciones duraderas\u201d lograr la\nintegraci\u00f3n local del refugiado en el pa\u00eds de asilo donde se le\nha reconocido. Para el ACNUR esta integraci\u00f3n debe ser un\nproceso integral que abarque la integraci\u00f3n legal, econ\u00f3mica\ny socialcultural.\n\n\nEn esta l\u00ednea, el presente cap\u00edtulo pretende mostrar la\nsituaci\u00f3n de los refugiados en relaci\u00f3n a su integraci\u00f3n\nsociocultural en Panam\u00e1, abarcando temas como su acceso a\nla vivienda, a derechos como la educaci\u00f3n, seguridad y justicia.\n\n\nparamilitares y en el caso de las mujeres como trabajadoras sexuales.\n\n\nEn el contexto laboral la discriminaci\u00f3n tambi\u00e9n\npuede afectar sus oportunidades de empleo debido al\ndesconocimiento generalizado sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado\ny la creencia de que \u201cel extranjero quita el trabajo a los\nnacionales\u201d. La b\u00fasqueda de soluciones duraderas mediante la\nsuperaci\u00f3n de las dificultades de integraci\u00f3n y la lucha contra\nla discriminaci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas sigue siendo uno\nde los principales retos para el ACNUR y sus socios.\n\n\n\n\n\nque son pocos los bancos que tienen conocimiento sobre el\nestatuto legal de refugiado, circunstancia que afecta de manera\nnegativa la posibilidad de abrir una cuenta bancaria o solicitar\nun pr\u00e9stamo necesario para acceder a vivienda propia o a otro\ntipo de bienes. Incluso, en el d\u00eda a d\u00eda, los refugiados indican\nque su identificaci\u00f3n como refugiado no  les facilita ni siquiera\nel cambiar un cheque.\n\n\nAdem\u00e1s se\u00f1alan que la posibilidad de abrir una cuenta\nqueda en muchas ocasiones a discreci\u00f3n de la persona que los\nrecibe en el Banco o de la posibilidad de aportar la numerosa\ndocumentaci\u00f3n que le exigen, mucha de ella del pa\u00eds de origen\n\n\n\nProducto de coordinaciones de la ONPAR, durante el 2014 la\nSuperintendencia de Bancos de Panam\u00e1 emiti\u00f3 una resoluci\u00f3n\ndonde reconoce la legitimidad de la documentaci\u00f3n de los\nrefugiados reconocidos y coloca a la ONPAR como agente de\nreferencia bancaria para ellos. No obstante, esta resoluci\u00f3n no\nes ampliamente conocida por los bancos, ni por los usuarios,\nd\u00e1ndose constantemente situaciones de discrecionalidad que\nlimitan la apertura de cuentas bancarias.\n\n\nM\u00e1s precaria a\u00fan es la situaci\u00f3n de los solicitantes de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado que durante el tiempo de espera no\nlogran abrir una cuenta.\n\n\n\nCuando una persona huye de su pa\u00eds de origen a causa de\npersecuci\u00f3n y cruza una frontera internacional esperando\nencontrar protecci\u00f3n, inicia un largo y dif\u00edcil camino\nen b\u00fasqueda de una vida de paz y dignidad. La falta de\nconocimiento sobre la condici\u00f3n de refugiado y lo que \u00e9sta\nimplica, afecta negativamente la vida de estas personas en\ntodas las etapas del ciclo de protecci\u00f3n, es decir, desde el\nmomento en que ingresan a un pa\u00eds y solicitan la protecci\u00f3n,\na lo largo del proceso de reconocimiento por parte del Estado\ny aun cuando finalmente obtienen el estatus formal como\nrefugiado reconocido.\n\n\nEl reconocimiento como refugiado es el primer paso de un\n\n\nDISCRIMINACI\u00d3N Y ESTIGMATIZACI\u00d3N\n\n\nEn la consulta hecha las personas refugiadas y solicitantes\nde asilo en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1 destacaron un alto nivel de\ndiscriminaci\u00f3n que se manifiesta en diferentes contextos\ncomo las escuelas, los centros de salud y los centros de polic\u00eda,\nentre otros.\n\n\nEn general, los prejuicios relacionados con la nacionalidad\ncolombiana hacen que muchos refugiados sufran una doble\nestigmatizaci\u00f3n no solo por ser refugiados sino tambi\u00e9n por ser\ncolombianos y ser tildados como narcotraficantes, guerrilleros,\n\n\n\n20 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 21\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "dirigida a su persona, su familia o su comunidad.\n\nDe igual manera los j\u00f3venes manifestaron la necesidad de\ncontar con mayor informaci\u00f3n sobre los centros especializados\nen planificaci\u00f3n familiar, salud sexual y salud reproductiva\nconsiderando que hay poca informaci\u00f3n al respecto.\n\n\nSeg\u00fan la poblaci\u00f3n consultada, los altos costos de los\nmedicamentos y las dificultades para acceder a servicios\nespecializados de salud, especialmente para personas con\nenfermedades cr\u00f3nicas, han llevado a algunos refugiados a\nsolicitar permisos especiales para regresar a sus pa\u00edses de\norigen con el objetivo de atenderse medicamente en estos, una\nsituaci\u00f3n que podr\u00eda significar un riesgo para su seguridad.\n\n\nEn Dari\u00e9n, la situaci\u00f3n es a\u00fan m\u00e1s complicada, debido a\nlos problemas estructurales que enfrentan las comunidades.\nSiendo algunas de las dificultades reportadas por la poblaci\u00f3n:\nla falta de acceso a servicios de salud especializados, la\nfalta de personal en los centros de salud comunitarios y el\n\n\n\n\n\nSALUD Y SEGURIDAD SOCIAL\n\n\nEl general, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado en Ciudad de Panam\u00e1 report\u00f3 tener\nacceso al sistema nacional de salud, sobre todo en los centros\nde salud comunitarios para la obtenci\u00f3n de servicios de primer\nnivel. Mientras que para consultas especializadas, reportaron\nrecibir atenci\u00f3n en el Hospital Santo Tomas, y en la Caja del\nSeguro Social, en el caso de ser cotizantes.\n\n\nAunque la poblaci\u00f3n no report\u00f3 tener dificultades para\nacceder a los servicios de salud estatales, si mencionaron\nsentirse discriminados a la hora de recibir la atenci\u00f3n. La falta\nde conocimiento y el estigma ligado al estatus de refugiado\npuede, en ocasiones, afectar el acceso efectivo a servicios\nb\u00e1sicos incluyendo la salud, donde la calidad del servicio o la\ncalidez de \u00e9ste se ve afectada por el desconocimiento sobre la\ncondici\u00f3n y, en algunos casos, por la nacionalidad del paciente.\n\n\nLa poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante de asilo tambi\u00e9n report\u00f3\ntener dificultades para acceder a servicios especializados,\nespecialmente los relacionados a salud mental. Este servicio\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "ACCESO A LA VIVIENDA Y A LA TIERRA\n\n\nLa falta de acceso al sistema bancario y las dificultades\npara obtener y mantener un trabajo estable, conlleva una serie\nconsecuencias para la integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y\nsolicitante de la condici\u00f3n de refugiado en Panam\u00e1, afectando\nentre otras cosas, su acceso a una vivienda digna, estable y con\ngarant\u00edas legales que los protejan de desalojos abusivos.\n\n\nLa dificultad de los refugiados y solicitantes de la condici\u00f3n\nde refugiado para acceder a una vivienda var\u00eda dependiendo\nde la condici\u00f3n o la etapa en el proceso en el que se encuentre,\nrecordando que un solicitante, a diferencia de un refugiado\nreconocido, no tiene derecho a un permiso de trabajo\nobstaculizando su generaci\u00f3n de ingresos.\n\n\nOtros estudios como el realizado por el Consejo Noruego\npara Refugiados llamado \u201cDerecho a vivienda, tierra y\npropiedad de mujeres desplazadas: Caso Panam\u00e1\u201d identifican\notras dificultades al momento de buscar una vivienda siendo\nla discriminaci\u00f3n uno de los principales problemas a los que\nse expone la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante, d\u00e1ndose casos\ndonde se niega el arriendo de un cuarto o una casa porque son\nextranjeros, especialmente si son colombianos.\n\n\nTodos estos aspectos hacen que muchos, especialmente los\nsolicitantes, tengan que optar por viviendas\n\n\n\nen barriadas lejanas a la Ciudad de Panam\u00e1, con problemas\nde inseguridad y con acceso limitado a servicios p\u00fablicos.\nCon frecuencia las personas solicitantes que arriendan se ven\nexpuestas ante el incumplimiento de los contratos por parte\nde sus arrendatarios, as\u00ed como a desalojos arbitrarios en los\nque suele mediar la intimidaci\u00f3n dado su \u201cestatus migratorio\u201d.\n\n\nLa poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en la Provincia de Dari\u00e9n tambi\u00e9n\nidentific\u00f3 el acceso a tierras como una de sus principales\npreocupaciones ya que afecta de manera directa la generaci\u00f3n\nde ingresos y su seguridad alimentaria al ser una poblaci\u00f3n,\nen su mayor\u00eda, dedicada a la agricultura de supervivencia.\n\n\nEn este sentido la poblaci\u00f3n expuso no tener acceso al\nderecho posesorio o a la propiedad directa de parcelas, ya que\nse encuentran dentro de tierras comarcales o desconocen los\nprocedimientos para formalizar la propiedad de estas tierras,\nsiendo su \u00fanica opci\u00f3n el alquiler de parcelas peque\u00f1as para\nel cultivo.\n\n\nEsta situaci\u00f3n los expone a casos de abuso por parte de los\npropietarios de las tierras, los cuales en algunas ocasiones se\nhan aprovechado de su poder qued\u00e1ndose con parte o toda\nla cosecha.\n\n\n\nSEGURIDAD CIUDADANA Y ACCESO A LA JUSTICIA\n\n\nLa seguridad, en particular en relaci\u00f3n con las autoridades,\nha sido identificada por los refugiados y solicitantes como uno\nde los retos principales. El desconocimiento de las autoridades\nsobre los derechos de las personas refugiadas y solicitantes,\naunado al desconocimiento generalizado sobre documentos\nde identidad expedidos por el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n\ny la ONPAR respectivamente, conduce a episodios de abuso\npor parte de las distintas entidades de seguridad.\n\n\nEl temor a la deportaci\u00f3n o la interrupci\u00f3n del proceso\nde solicitud de asilo en Panam\u00e1 hace que las personas se\nsientan d\u00e9biles y se abstengan de denunciar los casos de\nabuso, aumentando los riesgos de detenci\u00f3n arbitraria en los\nalbergues migratorios y, en algunas situaciones, los casos de\nextorsi\u00f3n para evitar la detenci\u00f3n.\n\n\nEL PROCESO DE PAZ EN COLOMBIA Y LA LEY DE V\u00cdCTIMAS Y RESTITUCI\u00d3N DE TIERRAS\n\n\nEn el 2011 el Gobierno de Colombia promulgo la Ley 1448\npor la cual se dictan medidas de atenci\u00f3n, asistencia y reparaci\u00f3n integral a las v\u00edctimas del conflicto armado interno de\nColombia. Dicha Ley reconoce la posibilidad de obtener cierta\nreparaci\u00f3n material y en algunos casos la restituci\u00f3n de sus\ntierras perdidas a raz\u00f3n del conflicto, de los nacionales colombianos que sufrieron violaciones y da\u00f1os como consecuencia\ndel conflicto armado. Esta reparaci\u00f3n podr\u00e1 ser solicitada tanto por las v\u00edctimas del conflicto que se quedaron en Colombia,\ncomo por los colombianos que residan en otros pa\u00edses, siempre y cuando cumplan con los requisitos establecidos por la\nLey 1448.\n\nLa remuneraci\u00f3n obtenida a trav\u00e9s de esta Ley, es un\nderecho de las v\u00edctimas del conflicto a los que podr\u00eda\nacceder poblaci\u00f3n solicitante y refugiada en Panam\u00e1. No\nobstante, la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada y solicitante manifest\u00f3 en\n\n\n\n\n\nEn las comunidades de Dari\u00e9n, en cambio, las personas\nidentificaron el uso de estupefacientes y el consumo del\nalcohol como una de las principales causas de violencia en las\ncomunidades, aunado a la falta de programas de prevenci\u00f3n\ndirigidos a j\u00f3venes.\n\n\nA esto tambi\u00e9n se le suma la situaci\u00f3n de seguridad que\nvive la regi\u00f3n de Dari\u00e9n y la comunidad de Puerto Obald\u00eda,\ndonde el control fronterizo y de movilizaci\u00f3n interna entre las\ncomunidades es muy estricto, produci\u00e9ndose enfrentamientos\nentre las entidades de seguridad y la poblaci\u00f3n. No obstante, a\npesar de que se han reportado casos de abusos, gran parte de la\npoblaci\u00f3n ex-PTH, ahora residente permanente, considera que la\nrelaci\u00f3n con las autoridades ha mejorado de manera considerable\ndespu\u00e9s de su regularizaci\u00f3n como residentes permanente.\n\n\nlas convocatorias del diagn\u00f3stico un gran desconcierto y\ndesinformaci\u00f3n sobre la Ley 1448 y el procedimiento para\nacceder a \u00e9sta, particularmente en Dari\u00e9n donde no hay\noficinas consulares de Colombia.\n\n\nPor otra parte, en comunidades rurales donde si hay\npresencia consular colombiana, como Puerto Obald\u00eda, el\nregistro ha sido lento debido al desconocimiento del proceso,\nel perfil de las personas que pueden ser reparadas y por\ntemor a que el proceso pueda exponerles a ser identificados y\nlocalizados por sus agentes persecutores.\n\n\nLa falta de acceso a servicios bancarios en Panam\u00e1 tambi\u00e9n\ndificulta el proceso de indemnizaci\u00f3n llevado a cabo por Colombia ya que solo se procede con la indemnizaci\u00f3n a trav\u00e9s\nde transferencias bancarias.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "4. Fortalecimiento institucional de ONPAR y capacitaci\u00f3n t\u00e9cnica a\nmiembros de la Comisi\u00f3n de Elegibilidad y personal de\nONPAR.\n\n\n_El actual panorama de asilo y las tendencias de la regi\u00f3n_\n_sugieren que la ONPAR debe ser fortalecida a nivel de recursos,_\n_particularmente el personal jur\u00eddico encargado de analizar_\n_las solicitudes de asilo. Una versi\u00f3n robustecida de ONPAR_\n_agilizar\u00eda la implementaci\u00f3n de medidas para la gesti\u00f3n de casos_\n_y distintas intervenciones de los solicitantes o refugiados ante la_\n_instituci\u00f3n. El fortalecimiento institucional de ONPAR incluye_\n_la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos internos que respondan a los vac\u00edos_\n_de protecci\u00f3n y obst\u00e1culos que dificultan la atenci\u00f3n eficaz_\n_de la poblaci\u00f3n ya sea en el inicio del procedimiento de asilo_\n\n_o consecuentes tr\u00e1mites administrativos como la renovaci\u00f3n_\n_de documentos, elaboraci\u00f3n de certificaciones, entre otros. La_\n_adecuaci\u00f3n de estos procedimientos tambi\u00e9n debe tomar en_\n_cuenta las necesidades especiales de la poblaci\u00f3n basados en un_\n_enfoque diferencial de g\u00e9nero, edad y diversidad._\n\n\n5. Elaboraci\u00f3n de procesos legales que permitan la expedici\u00f3n de\npermisos de trabajo provisionales para solicitantes de la\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiado y adecuaci\u00f3n de los actuales permisos\npara refugiados reconocidos con el fin de disminuir los\ncasos de discriminaci\u00f3n y abuso relacionados a su condici\u00f3n\nde refugiado.\n\n\n_El uso de c\u00f3digos para identificar los documentos de identidad_\n_de los refugiados es considerado una buena pr\u00e1ctica a nivel_\n_mundial que podr\u00eda ser adoptada en Panam\u00e1 con el fin de_\n_disminuir los casos de discriminaci\u00f3n generados por el uso_\n_del t\u00e9rmino \u201crefugiado\u201d en los documentos de identidad y_\n_permisos de trabajo. No obstante, es importante fortalecer estas_\n_medidas a trav\u00e9s de programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n dirigidos_\n_al p\u00fablico general._\n\n\n6. Procurar la inserci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas en las pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas,\nprogramas y planes sociales del Estado, sin distinci\u00f3n a su\ncondici\u00f3n de refugiados reconociendo sus vulnerabilidades y\nnecesidades de protecci\u00f3n especiales.\n\n\n_Panam\u00e1 dio un importante paso al incluir un eje tem\u00e1tico_\n_sobre mujeres refugiadas en la \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad_\n_de Oportunidades para las Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d, impulsado_\n_por el INAMU en el 2012, involucrando de esta manera_\n\n\n\n\n\nSITUACI\u00d3N ESPECIAL DE LAS MUJERES Y NI\u00d1AS REFUGIADAS Y SOLICITANTES DE LA CONDICI\u00d3N DE REFUGIADA\n\n\n\nLas mujeres refugiadas, como los hombres, est\u00e1n expuestas\na los distintos riesgos de protecci\u00f3n descritos a lo largo del\ndiagn\u00f3stico. No obstante, estas pueden sufrir de manera\ndiferente dichos riesgos, adem\u00e1s de sufrir otros muy espec\u00edficos\na su g\u00e9nero.\n\n\nLas mujeres refugiadas y solicitantes, principalmente en\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1, identificaron la discriminaci\u00f3n como el\nprincipal riesgo de protecci\u00f3n al que se enfrentan, en especial\nsi son mujeres colombianas. Esta discriminaci\u00f3n se manifiesta\nde distintas maneras, afectando tanto la b\u00fasqueda de trabajo,\ncomo el trato que pueden recibir a la hora de acceder a\nservicios p\u00fablicos.\n\n\nDurante la b\u00fasqueda de empleo, las mujeres est\u00e1n expuestas\na falsas promesas de trabajo que se convierten en situaciones\npeligrosas, sobre todo cuando buscan trabajo en internet para\npuestos laborales relacionados a la hoteler\u00eda y el servicio dom\u00e9stico.\n\n\nSon v\u00edctimas de violencia f\u00edsica y verbal, incluyendo\nsituaciones de abuso, donde se ven involucrados entidades\nde seguridad que las etiquetan inmediatamente como\ntrabajadoras sexuales y las exponen a situaciones de extorsi\u00f3n,\npago de \u201ccoimas\u201d o incluso insinuaciones sexuales. En general,\nlas mujeres reportaron no sentirse protegidas cuando son\ndetenidas por los agentes policiales y sienten temor de ser\nabordadas por la polic\u00eda en la calle.\n\n\nLas solicitantes de asilo y refugiadas tambi\u00e9n est\u00e1n expuestas\na violencia verbal y emocional durante sus jornadas de trabajo,\ny a situaciones de violencia de g\u00e9nero incluyendo violencia\nintrafamiliar y violencia sexual. Frente a estos tipos de abusos,\nlas mujeres reportaron no sentirse apoyadas, identificando\nla falta de protocolos de atenci\u00f3n para v\u00edctimas de violencia\nsexual como uno de los grandes vac\u00edos de protecci\u00f3n en\nCiudad de Panam\u00e1.\n\n\n\u00c9stas no cuentan con los conocimientos o los medios para\nresponder a estos tipos de violencia y destacan dificultades\n\n\n\na la hora de presentar las denuncias correspondiente,\nsiendo una de las m\u00e1s relevantes la falta de sensibilizaci\u00f3n\nde las autoridades, que no toman en serio las denuncias,\nle atribuyen la culpa a la v\u00edctima o no saben c\u00f3mo\nresponder a estos casos, re victimizando a la v\u00edctima.\n\n\nLa falta de medios econ\u00f3micos y de programas de asistencia\nlegal tambi\u00e9n significa que los casos, por lo general, queden\ninconclusos sin condenas.\n\n\nEn el caso de Dari\u00e9n las mujeres refugiadas y ex-PTH\nidentificaron la violencia intrafamiliar como uno de los\nproblemas m\u00e1s comunes en las comunidades. La respuesta\nbrindada a estos casos var\u00eda seg\u00fan la comunidad, report\u00e1ndose\ncasos donde las autoridades locales, como SENAFRONT y la\ncorregidur\u00eda, respond\u00edan correctamente y en otras desconoc\u00edan\nlos procedimientos legales y medidas de protecci\u00f3n relevantes.\n\n\nEn todas las comunidades se report\u00f3 una falta de acci\u00f3n de\nlas autoridades judiciales y el Ministerio Publico, considerando\nque la gran mayor\u00eda de estos casos se quedan sin respuestas\njudiciales debido a la falta de presencia de estas instituciones, la\nlejan\u00eda de las comunidades y los altos costos que representar\u00eda\npara la victima/sobreviviente dar seguimiento a su caso en las\nrepresentaciones locales del Ministerio Publico y juzgados.\n\n\nA esto se le suma la falta de conocimiento que tiene la\npoblaci\u00f3n en Dari\u00e9n, tanto refugiados como paname\u00f1os,\nsobre sus opciones de protecci\u00f3n fuera de la comunidad:\ncomo podr\u00edan ser los albergues para victimas/sobrevivientes\nde violencia domestica que maneja el Instituto Nacional de la\nMujer (INAMU) o las opciones de protecci\u00f3n que brinda la\nSecretaria Nacional de la Ni\u00f1ez, la Adolescencia y la Familia\n(SENNIAF) para los casos en que son v\u00edctimas ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y\nadolescentes.\n\n\nLas mujeres entrevistadas identificaron el machismo y el\nalto consumo de alcohol como las principales causas de los\naltos niveles de violencia intrafamiliar en las comunidades\nde Dari\u00e9n.\n\n\n###### **Conclusiones**\n### y recomendaciones\n\nPara promover un proceso de dise\u00f1o de programas que\nresponda a los vac\u00edos de protecci\u00f3n y riesgos identificados\npor los refugiados y solicitantes de asilo, se recomiendan\nuna serie de medidas para mejorar el proceso legal (1-4), la\nintegraci\u00f3n local (5-8) y acciones para visibilizar la situaci\u00f3n\nde la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada como respuesta directa a la\ndiscriminaci\u00f3n y xenofobia sufrida (9-10).\n\n\n1. Garantizar el acceso al derecho de asilo y el respeto a los principios\nde protecci\u00f3n.\n\n\n_Se sugiere la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos de referencia de casos_\n_entre las autoridades receptoras primarias y la ONPAR para_\n_asegurar el acceso al territorio y al procedimiento, reducir_\n_el riesgo de devoluci\u00f3n al pa\u00eds de origen (refoulement) y la_\n_adecuada atenci\u00f3n a casos con necesidades especiales as\u00ed como_\n_tambi\u00e9n la protecci\u00f3n internacional de ni\u00f1os no acompa\u00f1ados_\n\n_o separados solicitantes. Esto incluye la implementaci\u00f3n de_\n_los acuerdos alcanzados en la Conferencia Regional sobre_\n_Migraci\u00f3n (CRM) relativos a la identificaci\u00f3n y referencia de_\n_perfiles dentro de los movimientos migratorios mixtos._\n\n\n_En el 2014 ONPAR inicio un proceso para fortalecer esta_\n_coordinaci\u00f3n desarrollando un Acuerdo de entendimiento entre_\n_la ONPAR, SENAFRONT, el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n_\n_y la SENNIAF. No obstante este acuerdo debe ser fortalecido_\n_con la elaboraci\u00f3n de protocolos que definan claramente_\n_los procedimientos de identificaci\u00f3n, respuesta y referencia_\n_a estos casos._\n\n\n2. Reforma legal para adecuar las normas aplicables al\nprocedimiento de asilo nacional con los est\u00e1ndares\ninternacionales.\n\n\n_Entre otras cosas, esto incluye la adecuaci\u00f3n de la definici\u00f3n de_\n_refugiado tomando en cuenta la Declaraci\u00f3n y Plan de Acci\u00f3n_\n_de Brasilia para continuar avanzando en la aplicaci\u00f3n de la_\n_definici\u00f3n regional ampliada de refugiado, respondiendo as\u00ed a_\n_las necesidades de protecci\u00f3n internacional en la Regi\u00f3n._\n\n\n3. Garantizar un procedimiento de asilo justo y eficiente, que incorpore\nel debido proceso y tome en cuenta factores como la edad, el\ng\u00e9nero y la diversidad, incluyendo la utilizaci\u00f3n de int\u00e9rpretes\ncalificados y la adecuaci\u00f3n de procedimientos especiales para\nni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes.\n\n\n\n26 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015 27\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_otras instituciones estatales en la protecci\u00f3n y b\u00fasqueda de_\n_integraci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en el Pa\u00eds. La inclusi\u00f3n_\n_del tema \u201cRefugiados\u201d en Pol\u00edticas Publicas, planes, estudios_\n_y programas estatales ayuda a visibilizar la tem\u00e1tica frente_\n_a otras instituciones estatales que com\u00fanmente no se ven tan_\n_involucradas en la protecci\u00f3n legal de los refugiados, como_\n_si est\u00e1n la ONPAR, el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n y_\n_SENAFRONT, lo que podr\u00eda facilitar el acceso de la poblaci\u00f3n_\n_refugiada y solicitante a otros servicios estatales a la vez que_\n_reconoce de manera expl\u00edcita las vulnerabilidades asociadas_\n_a esta condici\u00f3n._\n\n\n_De igual manera es importante promover el acceso de los_\n_refugiados y solicitantes a los programas de asistencia estatales a_\n_trav\u00e9s de la creaci\u00f3n de conciencia y promoci\u00f3n, incluyendo los_\n_programas de protecci\u00f3n desarrollados por el Instituto Nacional_\n_de la Mujer (INAMU), la Secretaria Nacional de la Ni\u00f1ez, la_\n_Familia y la Adolescencia (SENNIAF), entre otros programas_\n_sociales como los desarrollados por el Ministerio de Vivienda_\n_para el acceso a una vivienda digna._\n\n\n7. Garantizar medidas de recuperaci\u00f3n psicosocial como proceso de\nacompa\u00f1amiento a las personas que han sido v\u00edctimas\nde violencia.\n\n\n8. Desarrollo de procedimientos operativos est\u00e1ndar para la prevenci\u00f3n\ny respuesta interinstitucional de casos de violencia de g\u00e9nero,\nviolencia sexual y violencia dom\u00e9stica.\n\n\n_El desarrollo de programas de atenci\u00f3n para personas con_\n_necesidades especiales en ONPAR al igual que la coordinaci\u00f3n_\n_y referencia de casos a otros programas estatales especializados_\n_en el trabajo psicosocial podr\u00eda ayudar a mejor la atenci\u00f3n de_\n_refugiados y solicitantes victimas/sobrevivientes de situaciones de_\n_violencia extrema y tortura. La reorientaci\u00f3n del Departamento_\n_de Trabajo Social y Psicolog\u00eda de la ONPAR es fundamental_\n_para lograr el desarrollo de estos espacios de coordinaci\u00f3n y_\n_atenci\u00f3n integral para la poblaci\u00f3n refugiada en Panam\u00e1._\n\n\n9. Desarrollo de una campa\u00f1a nacional de sensibilizaci\u00f3n y concienciaci\u00f3n\nsobre los derechos y deberes de los refugiados, dirigida a\ninstituciones p\u00fablicas, privadas, medios de comunicaci\u00f3n y\np\u00fablico general.\n\n\n28 Diagn\u00f3stico Participativo 2014-2015\n\n\n\n10. Elaborar programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n permanentes a trav\u00e9s de la\ninclusi\u00f3n del tema dentro de los programas de capacitaci\u00f3n\ndirigidos a autoridades receptoras primarias como el Servicio\nNacional de Migraci\u00f3n (SNM), el Servicio Nacional de\nFronteras (SENAFRONT) y la Polic\u00eda Nacional.\n\n\n_Mucho de los riesgos identificados en losl Diagn\u00f3sticos_\n_Participativos, tanto los anteriores como el actual, est\u00e1n_\n_relacionados a la falta de conocimiento por parte de las_\n_autoridades y del p\u00fablico en general sobre la condici\u00f3n de_\n_refugiado y la discriminaci\u00f3n relacionada a su nacionalidad,_\n_una situaci\u00f3n que puede afectar el trato que reciben los refugiados_\n_y solicitantes en instituciones p\u00fablicas, empresas privadas o_\n_del p\u00fablico en general, con impacto directo en la integraci\u00f3n_\n_de estas personas. Aunque en pasados a\u00f1os se han realizado_\n_programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n dirigidos a instituciones p\u00fablicas_\n_como el Servicio Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n y SENAFRONT estas_\n_son actividades puntuales que necesitan ser fortalecidas con_\n_campa\u00f1as nacionales. La falta de campa\u00f1as y un programa_\n_nacional de sensibilizaci\u00f3n se mantienen como respuestas_\n_pendientes de otros diagn\u00f3sticos participativos._\n\n\n_La necesidad de contar con campa\u00f1as de sensibilizaci\u00f3n_\n_tambi\u00e9n ha sido reconocida en documentos estatales como_\n_la \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad de Oportunidades para_\n_las Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d la cual establece en su Eje Tem\u00e1tico:_\n_Migraci\u00f3n, trata, refugiadas y privadas de libertad la necesidad_\n_de desarrollar campa\u00f1as de sensibilizaci\u00f3n e informaci\u00f3n a_\n_p\u00fablico general e implementar programas de sensibilizaci\u00f3n_\n_y supervisi\u00f3n dirigidos al funcionariado p\u00fablico relacionado_\n_a sus tr\u00e1mites._\n\n\n_La \u201cPol\u00edtica P\u00fablica de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las_\n_Mujeres (PPIOM)\u201d tambi\u00e9n reconoce la necesidad impulsar_\n_acciones de sensibilizaci\u00f3n y cambio de actitudes mis\u00f3ginas y_\n_discriminatorias para evitar la estigmatizaci\u00f3n y rechazo de las_\n_mujeres refugiadas y reconoce tambi\u00e9n la necesidad de establecer_\n_programas para la integraci\u00f3n socioecon\u00f3mica de \u00e9stas,_\n_entre otros. No obstante, esta herramienta de pol\u00edtica p\u00fablica_\n_requiere para su implementaci\u00f3n efectiva una coordinaci\u00f3n_\n_interinstitucional que garantice la inclusi\u00f3n del tema de manera_\n_transversal en todas las instituciones del estado._\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/200a6f95-f5ae-3041-b9bb-e7bc96f6206b/10073.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_100/raw/doc_100_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,552 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A South Sudanese refugee\u0003** at the Leitchour camp in the\nGambella region of Ethiopia, near the border with South Sudan.\nRefugee camps in the border area were recently flooded by\nheavy rains and storms, leaving mud huts completely covered\nin water. Many refugees had to find temporary shelter in nearby\nvillages. The Leitchuor refugee camp housed over 40,000\nrefugees in October 2014, before disaster hit.\n\n\n**2** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### I Global Trends\n\n_During the first half of_ 2014 _,\u0003 conflict continued to result in the displacement of millions of_\n_refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) globally causing significant changes in the_\n_trends and number of refugees, asylum-seekers, IDPs and others of concern to UNHCR. In this_\n_context, management of humanitarian crises is increasingly complex, including with regard to_\n_the production of timely and comprehensive statistics._\n\n\n\nhis report is the\nsecond of its kind,\u0003\n**analyzing displacement**\n**trends within the first half**\n**of** 2014 **. The figures in this**\n\n|T|Col2|\n|---|---|\n|||\n\n**report were collected from govern-**\n**ments and UNHCR offices around**\n**the world. UNHCR introduced a**\n**new online data collection tool to**\n**enhance the organization\u2019s capacity**\n**to collect and analyse mid-year sta-**\n**tistical data. In addition to improv-**\n**ing the timeliness and comprehen-**\n**siveness of mid-year reporting from**\n**UNHCR offices, the new tool allows**\n**the organization to make the actual**\n**data available publically as well as**\n**in this report.** **[1]**\n\n**Unless otherwise specified, fig-**\n**ures are limited to events occurring**\n**up to** 30 **June** 2014 **. The statistics**\n**included in this report should be**\n**considered provisional and subject**\n**to change, especially in regard to**\n**asylum trends.**\n\n\nGlobal Trends\n**Between January and June** 2014 **,**\n**UNHCR offices reported an esti-**\n**mated** 5.5 **million new forcibly dis-**\n**placed persons either within or out-**\n**side their own country. As a result,**\n**and taking into account reductions**\n**in existing populations due to vol-**\n**untary repatriation, resettlement,**\n**revision of figures and other devel-**\n**opments, the total number of per-**\n\n\n\n**sons of concern to UNHCR by mid-**\n2014 **stood at** 46.3 **million, compared**\n**to** 42.9 **million at the end of** 2013 **.**\n**The total number of refugees\u0003**\n**under UNHCR\u2019s mandate was** 13.0\n**million by mid-year, the highest**\n**since** 1996 **. This is almost** 1.3 **mil-**\n**lion persons more than at the start**\n**of the year (** 11.7 **million) and** 2.1 **mil-**\n**lion more than in June** 2013 **(** 11.1\n**million). During the same period,**\n**the total number of IDPs protected**\n\n\n\n\n\n**http://popstats.unhcr.org/**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The number of asylum-seekers waiting for a decision on their individual\nasylum applications was approaching\nthe 1.3 million mark. **[2]** This constituted\nan increase of more than 100,000 persons since the start of the year and some\n#### II Refugees\n\n\nBy Origin\nAfghanistan has been the largest source\ncountry of refugees for more than three\ndecades, at peak (1990-91) recording\nmore than six million refugees, mostly\nin Pakistan and the Islamic Republic of\nIran. By mid-2014, at more than three\nmillion registered refugees, Syrians had\novertaken Afghans as the largest refugee\npopulation under UNHCR\u2019s mandate, a\nreflection of the continuous conflict and\nviolence in the country. Just two years\nago, the Syrian Arab Republic did not\neven feature among the top 30 source\ncountries of refugees, a turnaround\nclearly demonstrating the rapid deterioration of the situation in that country.\n\nEven though more than 100 coun\n\n**4** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\n290,000 more than 12 months earlier.\nIn contrast, the number of reported\nstateless persons remained relatively\nstable at 3.5 million.\n\nThe first part of 2014 also marked\na shift in both the balance of the main\nsource countries of refugees and their\ngeographic location. The Asia and Pacific\nregion has been the largest source region\nof refugees for more than a decade. In\nview of the steady outflow of Syrian ref\n\ntries around the world reported the presence of Syrian refugees during the first\nhalf of 2014, neighbouring countries\ncontinue to shoulder by and large the\nhighest burden. This includes Lebanon\n(1.1 million), Turkey (798,000), Jordan\n(645,600), Iraq (220,400), and Egypt\n(138,100). During the first half of the\nyear, the net Syrian refugee population\ngrew by more than half a million persons in these five countries alone.\n\nSyrian refugees accounted for nearly a quarter (23%) of all refugees under\nUNHCR\u2019s mandate by the middle of\n2014. Further, Syrian refugees outside\ntheir country represented about 14 per\ncent of the country\u2019s resident population\nat the beginning of the conflict. **[3]**\n\n\n\nugees into neighbouring countries, however, the Middle East and North Africa\nregion is now the main region of origin\nof refugees worldwide. This change has\nhad significant impact on the rankings\nof the largest refugee-hosting and refugee-producing countries. n\n\n\n**2** Refers to persons whose application for asylum or\nrefugee status is pending at any stage in the asylum\nprocedure.\n\n\nWith 2.7 million refugees, Afghans\ndropped to the second largest refugee\ngroup under the UNHCR mandate.\nDespite the voluntary return of about\n10,000 Afghan refugees from Pakistan\nand the Islamic Republic of Iran during\nthe first half of 2014, the global number\nof Afghan refugees increased by about\n135,000 persons. This was mainly\ndue to the Government of the Islamic\nRepublic of Iran revising its estimate\nof Afghan refugees in the country\nfrom 814,000 to 950,000. In addition,\nPakistan hosted some 1.6 million\nAfghan refugees at mid-year.\n\n\n**3** Source for national population: United Nations, Population\nDivision, World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision,\nNew York, 2013.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "***** Includes people in a refugee-like situation.\n\n\nSomalis remained the third largest\nrefugee group worldwide with 1.1 million persons by mid-2014, mainly in\nKenya (425,700), Ethiopia (244,300),\nand Yemen (234,800). The overall figure dropped by about 41,000 persons,\nmainly because of the spontaneous return of 10,000 Somalis and a verification exercise conducted among Somali\nrefugees in Kenyan refugee camps.\nWith an estimated 670,300 refugees\nat mid-year, the number of Sudanese\nrefugees remained relatively stable in\nrelation to the start of the year (648,900).\nIn contrast, the outbreak of violence in\nSouth Sudan, which started in December 2013, triggered a major outflow into\nneighbouring countries. The overall\nnumber of South Sudanese refugees\ngrew from 114,500 to 508,600 within\na span of just six months. By the middle of the year, individuals from South\nSudan had found refuge predominantly\nin Ethiopia (208,800), Uganda (141,400),\nSudan (82,000), and Kenya (75,700). As\na result, South Sudan was the fifth largest source country of refugees worldwide.\nWhile estimates for refugees originating from the Democratic Republic\nof the Congo and Myanmar remained\nvirtually unchanged at 493,500 and\n479,700, respectively, the number of\nIraqi refugees grew as conflict and violence unfolded in their country. As such,\nthe number of Iraqi refugees increased\nfrom 401,500 to 426,100 within the\n\n\n\n\n***** Syrian refugee figure is a Government estimate.\n\n****** The 300,000 Vietnamese refugees are well integrated and in practice receive protection from\nthe Government of China.\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **5**\n\n\n\nfirst six months of the year, turning\nIraq into the eight largest refugee source\ncountry.\n\nThe number of Colombian refugees,\nincluding individuals in a refugee-like\nsituation, remained stable at about\n397,000. In stark contrast, refugees\nfrom the Central African Republic were\nfor the first time ever included among\nthe top 10 source countries of refugees.\nThe outbreak of violence in the Cen\n\n\ntral African Republic in late 2013 triggered the exodus of more than 143,000\npeople into neighbouring countries,\nturning it into one of the most challenging emergencies during the reporting period. Overall, some 381,000\npersons had found refuge by the end\nof the reporting period, including in\nCameroon (205,500), Chad (92,100), the\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n(60,600), and the Republic of Congo\n(16,400). This compares to 252,900 at\nthe start of the year. Many of the new\narrivals had already been displaced internally within their country as a result\nof the violence in late 2013.\n\nThe top 10 source countries of refugees combined accounted for 78 per\ncent of all refugees under UNHCR\u2019s\nmandate. The top three alone \u2013 the Syrian Arab Republic, Afghanistan, and\nSomalia \u2013 made up 52 per cent. Half of\nthese 10 countries, it should be noted, are\nin sub-Saharan Africa.\n\n\n\nBy Country of Asylum\nConflict and violence in the Syrian Arab\nRepublic, South Sudan, and the Central\nAfrican Republic, among other countries, significantly affected the rankings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "verification exercise",
-          "confidence": 0.9714757800102234,
-          "start": 77,
-          "end": 79
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Kenyan refugee camps",
-          "confidence": 0.92560213804245,
-          "start": 84,
-          "end": 87
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.5215771794319153,
-          "start": 135,
-          "end": 136
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Somali\nrefugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9162148833274841,
-          "start": 81,
-          "end": 83
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "rankings",
-          "confidence": 0.9067321419715881,
-          "start": 626,
-          "end": 627
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Syrian Arab\nRepublic",
-          "confidence": 0.6892556548118591,
-          "start": 606,
-          "end": 609
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "of the top 10 refugee-hosting countries.\nWhile Pakistan continued to host the\nlargest number of refugees worldwide\n\n   - some 1.6 million refugees, virtually all\nfrom Afghanistan \u2013 Lebanon became\nthe second largest host country. With\nan increase of about 325,000 Syrians\nduring the first half of the year, by mid2014 the country\u2019s registered refugee\npopulation passed the 1.1 million mark.\nLebanon has thus moved from being the\n69 [th] largest refugee-hosting country to\nsecond largest within a span of just three\nand a half years.\n\nThe Government of the Islamic\nRepublic of Iran, meanwhile, revised the\nestimated number of Afghan refugees in\nits territory from 814,000 to 950,000.\nTogether with an estimated 32,000\nIraqi refugees and other populations, the\ncountry was the third largest refugeehosting country by mid-year, with an\noverall total of 982,100.\n\nThe Syrian crisis continued to impact on not only Lebanon but also\nTurkey and Jordan. Turkey reported a\ntotal of 824,400 registered refugees at\nmid-year, 97 per cent of them from the\nSyrian Arab Republic. Jordan\u2019s figure\nstood at 736,600 refugees, including\n645,600 Syrians and 89,700 Iraqis. In\nboth cases, figures have increased significantly during the reporting period.\n\nEthiopia was not only the sixth largest refugee-hosting country worldwide\nby mid-year, with a total of 587,700\n\n\n**6** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\nrefugees, but it simultaneously replaced\nKenya as the largest recipient in subSaharan Africa. This shift was due\nlargely to the mass inflow of 159,000\nSouth Sudanese refugees during the\nfirst half of the year.\nWith a total of 537,000 refugees,\nKenya was the second largest host country on the continent by mid-year, including 42,800 refugees who were recognized on a _prima facie_ basis during the\nfirst six months of the year, most of them\n\n\n\nfrom South Sudan. Kenya was followed\nby Chad with 454,900 refugees. The\nrefugee population in Chad has grown\nfrom less than 13,000 refugees in 2001\nto its current high of 454,900.\n\nFighting in both South Sudan and\nthe eastern part of the Democratic\nRepublic of the Congo also impacted\nheavily on Uganda. Some 118,000 South\nSudanese were granted _prima facie_ status\nduring the first six months of 2014, as\nwere 13,000 Congolese. By mid-year,\nUganda was the ninth largest host country of refugees worldwide, with 358,500\npersons, its highest level on record.\n\nThe top 10 refugee-hosting countries\ncombined hosted 58 per cent of all refugees under UNHCR\u2019s mandate.\n\n\nNew Refugee Arrivals\nMore than 1.4 million persons were\nnewly displaced across international borders during the first half of 2014. The\noverwhelming majority found refuge in\nneighbouring countries or in the immediate region. This figure of 1.4 million refers to refugees who have been recognized\non a _prima facie_ basis as well as those who\nhave been granted temporary protection.\n\nSyrians accounted for roughly\nhalf of these new outflows (704,400).\nMost of the other half originated from\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "registered refugee\npopulation",
-          "confidence": 0.6755706667900085,
-          "start": 62,
-          "end": 65
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "South Sudan (393,600), the Central\nAfrican Republic (144,400), and\nPakistan (126,400). **[4]** In addition, some\n146,000 persons were recognized on\nan individual basis, a quarter of them\nSyrians.\n\nThe largest numbers of new refugee\narrivals during the first half of 2014\nwere reported by Lebanon (324,900),\nTurkey (250,300), Ethiopia (177,500),\nUganda (130,900), Afghanistan\n(126,400), Cameroon (111,200), and\nJordan (85,000). Among the top 10\ncountries reporting large numbers of\nnew refugee arrivals, nine are located\neither in the Middle East and North\nAfrica or sub-Saharan Africa.\n\n\nContributions of\nHost Countries\nThese rankings and distributions\nchange significantly when comparing\nthe number of refugees to the population of the host country (though without accounting for national income and\nother economic indicators). This indicator measures the density of a refugee\npopulation relative to the host country\u2019s\nnationals, implying that the higher the\nnumber of refugees per 1,000 inhabitants, the higher the density.\n\n\n\nWith 257 refugees per 1,000 inhabitants, Lebanon remains the country with\nthe highest refugee density at mid-2014.\nJordan (114) and Chad (39) are second and\nthird in these rankings, respectively.\nWith 12 refugees per 1,000 inhabitants,\n\n\n\nwith 404 refugees per 1 USD GDP. Six\nmonths earlier, Ethiopia was second\nin this ranking, a change that clearly\nreflects the mass inflow of refugees\nfrom South Sudan. Pakistan and Chad\nwere second and third with 334 and\n\n\n\nLebanon remains the country with\nthe highest refugee density at mid-2014.\n\n\n\nSweden is the only major recipient of\nrefugees among industrialized countries\nincluded among the top 10 ranked countries for this indicator.\nAn examination of the relative economic strength of refugee-hosting countries to their ratios of Gross Domestic\nProduct (GDP), measured at Purchasing\nPower Parity (PPP) **[5]** per capita, **[6]** likewise\nresults in wide and diverse distributions\namong countries. In relative terms, the\nhigher the ratio (1 USD GDP measured\nat PPP per capita), the higher the burden\non a country\u2019s national income and economic resources.\nBy mid-2014, Ethiopia hosted the\nlargest number of refugees relative to\nits national income measured at PPP,\n\n\n#### III Asylum-Seekers\n\n\n\nAt least 558,600 individual asylum\napplications were registered in 172\ncountries or territories during the first\nhalf of 2014, some 18 per cent more\nthan during the same period in 2013\n(456,000). An estimated 17 per cent of\nthese claims were registered at \u2018second\ninstance\u2019, including with courts and\nother appellate bodies. UNHCR offices\nregistered 108,500 individual asylum\napplications, out of the provisional total\nof 558,600 (19%).\n\nThese figures exclude asylum applications registered with South Africa\u2019s\nDepartment of Home Affairs, however,\nin the absence of such data provided by\nthe Government. As South Africa has\n\n\n\nreported the highest number of new\nasylum claims globally between 2008\nand 2012, and was the world\u2019s third largest recipient in 2013, the rankings and\nglobal totals in this report must be considered as merely indicative.\n\n\nNew Individual Asylum\nApplications Registered\nGermany (67,400) received the highest number of new asylum applications\nworldwide during the first six months\nof 2014. Syrians lodged almost one fifth\n(18%), or 12,100, of these claims. If current trends continue, Germany is likely\nto record its highest annual level of asylum claims in almost 20 years. Other\n\n\n\n199 refugees per 1 USD GDP (PPP),\nrespectively. Ultimately, almost all of\nthe countries listed among the top 40\nbased on this economic indicator were\nconsidered developing economies,\nwith more than half of them located\nin sub-Saharan Africa. n\n\n\n**4** Refers to persons in a refugee-like situation in\nAfghanistan.\n\n**5** Source for Gross Domestic Product (Purchasing\nPower Parity): International Monetary Fund, World\nEconomic Outlook Database, October 2014 (accessed\n16 November 2014).\n\n**6** Source for national populations: United Nations,\nPopulation Division, World Population Prospects: The\n2012 Revision, New York, 2013.\n\n\nmajor nationalities lodging new asylum\nclaims in Germany included Serbia (and\nKosovo: S/RES/1244 (1999)) (8,200),\nAfghanistan (4,200), and Eritrea\n(3,900).\nGermany was followed by the United\nStates of America with an estimated\n47,500 new asylum applications, **[7]**\nmost of them from Mexico (6,600),\nChina (6,400), Guatemala (3,700), and\n\n\n**7** Estimated number of individuals based on the\nnumber of new cases (28,100) and multiplied by 1.356\nto reflect the average number of individuals per case\n(Source: US Department of Homeland Security); and\nnumber of new \u2018defensive\u2019 asylum requests lodged\nwith the Executive Office of Immigration Review\n(14,330, reported by individuals).\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "World\nEconomic Outlook Database",
-          "confidence": 0.8488309383392334,
-          "start": 775,
-          "end": 779
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "Source for Gross Domestic Product",
-          "confidence": 0.5979540944099426,
-          "start": 760,
-          "end": 765
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "International Monetary Fund",
-          "confidence": 0.8246379494667053,
-          "start": 771,
-          "end": 774
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.9116941094398499,
-          "start": 650,
-          "end": 651
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "World Population Prospects",
-          "confidence": 0.783461332321167,
-          "start": 805,
-          "end": 808
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "Source for national populations",
-          "confidence": 0.5334083437919617,
-          "start": 794,
-          "end": 798
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.5417216420173645,
-          "start": 816,
-          "end": 817
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Estimated number of individuals",
-          "confidence": 0.7177318334579468,
-          "start": 919,
-          "end": 923
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.7555271983146667,
-          "start": 990,
-          "end": 991
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "El Salvador (3,700). France was the third\nmost important destination for asylumseekers with 29,900 new asylum applications recorded, principally from\nthe Democratic Republic of the Congo\n(3,100), the Russian Federation (1,800),\nand Albania (1,600). Other important\ndestination countries for asylum-seekers were Sweden (28,400 new asylum\nclaims), Turkey (27,800), **[8]** Italy (24,500),\nand the Russian Federation (17,900). **[9]**\n\nDuring the first half of 2014,\nUNHCR\u2019s offices registered 103,000\nnew individual applications for refugee\nstatus and another 5,500 on appeal or\nfor review. The office in Turkey received\nthe largest number of new requests\n(27,800), followed by Malaysia (12,700),\nKenya (12,100), Jordan (10,800),\nand Cameroon (6,700). The top five\nUNHCR offices receiving asylum applications during the period under review\nregistered 68 per cent of all new claims\nrecorded by the organization.\n\n\n\nBy Origin\nSyrians were the largest group of\nasylum-seekers worldwide during the\nreporting period, with a total of 59,600\nnew asylum applications. Germany and\nSweden together received 40 per cent of\nthese claims. As a point of comparison,\nthe total number of countries or territories that registered Syrian asylum\nclaims increased from 92 during the\nfirst half of 2013 to 96 a year later.\n\nIraqis were the second largest group\nof asylum-seekers with a total of 28,900\nnew applications registered during\nthe first half of 2014, most of them in\nTurkey (15,700), Jordan (5,700), and\nGermany (2,100). Other important\nsource countries of asylum-seekers were\nAfghanistan (26,400), Eritrea (23,300),\nthe Democratic Republic of the Congo\n(21,700), and Ukraine (20,300).\nAmong the main nationalities\nlodging applications for international\nprotection, Total Recognition Rates\n\n\n\n(TRRs) **[10 ]** were around or significantly\nabove 80 per cent for asylum-seekers\nfrom the Syrian Arab Republic, Eritrea, Iraq, Myanmar, Somalia, and the\nCentral African Republic. In contrast,\nTRRs were around or below 10 per\ncent for asylum-seekers from Albania,\nBangladesh, Georgia, and Serbia (and\nKosovo: S/RES/1244 (1999)).\nBy the middle of the year, close to 1.3\nmillion individuals awaited decisions on\ntheir asylum claims, a figure that included applicants at any stage of the asylum\nprocess. This was the highest such number in more than 15 years. The largest\nbacklogs of undecided cases were reported by South Africa (244,000), Germany\n(161,900), the United States of America\n(96,100), and Turkey (66,600). n\n\n\n\n**8** This figure includes asylum-seekers registered with UNHCR as well as asylum-seekers who have been preregistered but who are pending formal registration with UNHCR.\n\n**9** Refers to 3,000 individuals who applied for refugee status and 14,900 for temporary asylum.\n\n**10** In the absence of an internationally agreed methodology for calculating recognition rates, the Total\nRecognition Rate is calculated by dividing the number of asylum-seekers granted Convention refugee status\nor a complementary form of protection by the total number of substantive decisions (Convention status,\ncomplementary protection, and rejected cases). Non-substantive decisions are, to the extent possible, excluded\nfrom the calculation. For the purpose of global comparability, UNHCR does not report rates calculated by national\nauthorities.\n\n\n**8** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "IV\n\n\n###### (IDPs)\n#### Internally Displaced Persons\n\n\n\nInformation on the global number of\nnewly displaced persons within their\ncountry was not available at the time of\nwriting this report. **[11]** Based on information provided by UNHCR offices in 25\ncountries, an estimated 4.1 million individuals were newly displaced within\nthe borders of their countries as a result\nof war and conflict during the first half\nof the year. Countries particularly affected by this trend were Iraq (986,000\nnewly displaced by 30 June 2014), South\nSudan (970,000), Philippines (574,000),\nthe Democratic Republic of the Congo\n(483,000), Pakistan (481,000), and\nSudan (395,000).\nBy the end of the reporting period,\nUNHCR offices reported a total of 26.0\nmillion IDPs **[12]** who benefited from the\norganization\u2019s protection and assistance\nactivities. This was 2.1 million more\nthan at the beginning of the year. With\nan estimated 6.5 million IDPs, the Syrian Arab Republic continued to face the\nlargest situation of internal displacement\nworldwide. It was followed by Colombia, whose Government had registered\n5.7 million IDPs by mid-2014. Other\ncountries with large IDP populations\nby the end of the reporting period included the Democratic Republic of the\nCongo (2.6 million), Sudan (2.1 million), **[13]** Iraq (1.9 million), South Sudan\n(1.3 million), **[14]** Pakistan (1.2 million), and\nSomalia (1.1 million).\n\n\n\nOn a more positive note, some\n1.6 million IDPs returned home during the reporting period in those countries where UNHCR was operational.\nThis compares to 688,000 during\nthe first half of 2013. Significant IDP\nreturns were reported by the Philippines\n(518,800), the Central African Republic\n(359,400), the Democratic Republic of\nthe Congo (246,500), Sudan (129,000),\nand Mali (126,000). n\n\n\n\n**11** The IDP populations reported in UNHCR statistics\nare limited to conflict-generated IDPs or persons in\nan IDP-like situation, to whom the agency extends\nprotection or assistance. Therefore, UNHCR\u2019s IDP\nstatistics do not necessarily reflect the entire IDP\npopulation in a given country, but rather only those\nwho are protected and assisted by the agency. Hence,\nUNHCR\u2019s statistics do not provide a comprehensive\npicture of global internal displacement.\n\n**12** Includes 267,500 persons in an IDP-like situation in\nMyanmar, South Sudan, and Sudan.\n\n**13** Includes 77,300 persons in an IDP-like situation.\n\n**14** Includes 155,200 persons in an IDP-like situation.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#### V Stateless Persons\n\n\n\ncountries or territories reported a total of\n3.5 million stateless persons by mid2014, a figure that has remained relatively unchanged compared to previous\nreporting periods. n\n\n\n\nThe precise number of stateless persons worldwide is unknown. Yet based\non available information and data,\nUNHCR estimates the total number of\nindividuals under the agency\u2019s stateless\n\n**10** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\nness mandate to be at least 10 million\nglobally. By mid-2014, statistical information on stateless persons was available for 77 countries or territories, two\nmore than six months earlier. These\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.975463330745697,
-          "start": 430,
-          "end": 432
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8873865604400635,
-          "start": 351,
-          "end": 352
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.5274094939231873,
-          "start": 499,
-          "end": 500
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "IDP\nstatistics",
-          "confidence": 0.980229377746582,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9664002060890198,
-          "start": 455,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.801721453666687,
-          "start": 632,
-          "end": 633
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "IDP\npopulation",
-          "confidence": 0.7909243106842041,
-          "start": 466,
-          "end": 468
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "statistical information on stateless persons",
-          "confidence": 0.9376713633537292,
-          "start": 646,
-          "end": 651
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.816483736038208,
-          "start": 611,
-          "end": 612
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "77 countries or territories",
-          "confidence": 0.7809080481529236,
-          "start": 654,
-          "end": 658
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.841802716255188,
-          "start": 632,
-          "end": 633
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "mid-2014",
-          "confidence": 0.9765579104423523,
-          "start": 644,
-          "end": 645
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "stateless persons",
-          "confidence": 0.8599064946174622,
-          "start": 649,
-          "end": 651
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Khitan, a Syrian refugee woman,\u0003** and her three sons (one shown in the picture) found shelter in an unfinished building in Tripoli,\nLebanon with several other Syrian families. One of her sons was injured when a shell hit their home in Aleppo; another was killed\nin a separate incident. Her husband and another son remain behind in their war-torn country.\n\n\n\nVI\n\n\n#### Resettlement\n\n\n\nSome 37,000 refugees departed on resettlement with UNHCR assistance\nduring the first half of 2014. This figure was about 4,300 persons more than\nits corresponding value one year earlier\n(33,700). UNHCR offices in 74 countries\nwere involved in the processing of these\nindividuals from 57 nationalities.\n\nThe largest number of refugees\n\n\n\nwho benefited from resettlement programmes during the first half of the year\noriginated from Myanmar (9,300), Iraq\n(5,300), Bhutan (5,100), Somalia (4,300),\nand the Syrian Arab Republic (3,500).\nPersons from these five countries combined accounted for 81 per cent of all\nUNHCR-assisted resettlement departures.\n\nSimilarly, countries that reported\n\n\n\nVII\n\n\n#### Refugee Returns\n\n\n\nthe largest number of resettlement departures with UNHCR\u2019s assistance included Malaysia (6,100), Nepal (5,100),\nTurkey (3,900), Lebanon (3,800),\nThailand (3,500), and Kenya (2,100).\nTogether, these six countries accounted\nfor two-thirds (67%) of the global number\nof resettlement cases processed during\nthe first half of the year. n\n\n\nCountries with the highest number of refugee departures included\nthe Democratic Republic of the\nCongo (14,400), Chad (13,100),\nLiberia (12,200), Congo (9,900),\nPakistan (7,400), Kenya (7,300), and\nthe Central African Republic (7,200). n\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **11**\n\n\n\nThe number of refugees returning\nto their country of origin continued a\ndownward trend observed in previous\nyears. Some 107,000 refugees returned\nduring the first six months of 2014,\ncompared to 189,300 during the corresponding period of 2013. Some 69,000\nof those who had returned by mid\n\n\n2014 did so with UNHCR assistance.\nUNHCR offices in 28 countries reported the return of refugees, with the largest from the Democratic Republic of the\nCongo (20,000), Mali (15,600), and C\u00f4te\nd\u2019Ivoire (12,300). Together, these three\ncountries of origin accounted for 58 per\ncent of all returnees.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR-assisted resettlement departures",
-          "confidence": 0.8592745065689087,
-          "start": 208,
-          "end": 211
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.7464168071746826,
-          "start": 293,
-          "end": 294
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**12** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **13**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 1 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by country/territory of asylum \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBolivia\n\n\nBonaire,\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>72<br>106<br>94,144<br>23,783<br>-<br>3,415<br>3,177<br>4<br>34,503<br>55,598<br>1,314<br>12<br>299<br>32,584<br>1<br>628<br>29,179<br>10<br>219<br>747<br>-<br>6,907<br>2,766<br>5,952<br>-<br>-<br>4,320<br>33,104<br>47,805<br>-<br>70<br>215,057<br>160,279<br>6<br>7,753<br>454,882<br>1,752<br>301,033<br>184<br>-<br>237<br>-<br>49,192<br>12,800<br>2,842<br>560<br>369<br>19<br>4,281<br>2,979<br>117,907<br>13,160<br>20,695<br>-<br>615<br>54,789<br>237,117<br>39|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>143,177<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>11,500<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>200,000<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>11,311<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>7,820<br>-<br>21<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>68,344<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>143,249<br>106<br>94,144<br>23,783<br>-<br>3,415<br>14,677<br>4<br>34,503<br>55,598<br>1,314<br>12<br>299<br>232,584<br>1<br>628<br>29,179<br>10<br>219<br>747<br>-<br>6,907<br>2,766<br>5,952<br>-<br>-<br>4,320<br>33,104<br>47,805<br>-<br>70<br>226,368<br>160,279<br>6<br>7,753<br>454,882<br>1,752<br>301,033<br>184<br>-<br>237<br>-<br>49,192<br>20,620<br>2,842<br>581<br>369<br>19<br>4,281<br>2,979<br>117,907<br>13,160<br>20,695<br>-<br>615<br>123,133<br>237,117<br>39|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_143,249_<br>_106_<br>_90,137_<br>_5,072_<br>_-_<br>_82_<br>_6,414_<br>_1_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1,314_<br>_12_<br>_299_<br>_32,584_<br>_1_<br>_299_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_219_<br>_106_<br>_-_<br>_6,907_<br>_2,766_<br>_644_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_2,462_<br>_33,104_<br>_47,805_<br>_-_<br>_70_<br>_226,368_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_7,753_<br>_454,882_<br>_173_<br>_102_<br>_184_<br>_-_<br>_43_<br>_-_<br>_49,192_<br>_19,803_<br>_2,842_<br>_581_<br>_229_<br>_19_<br>_28_<br>_-_<br>_45,436_<br>_-_<br>_20,695_<br>_-_<br>_615_<br>_54,789_<br>_237,117_<br>_13_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>93<br>290<br>3,894<br>20,040<br>-<br>992<br>52<br>1<br>14,223<br>22,745<br>279<br>16<br>47<br>13<br>-<br>208<br>10,360<br>62<br>79<br>9<br>-<br>15<br>214<br>6,325<br>3<br>-<br>2,048<br>259<br>9,051<br>-<br>21<br>14,091<br>17,468<br>2<br>349<br>1,492<br>500<br>409<br>2,220<br>6<br>158<br>-<br>2,735<br>1,609<br>731<br>161<br>3<br>49<br>2,830<br>375<br>1,408<br>2,675<br>3,814<br>-<br>819<br>11,583<br>25,194<br>4|\n\n\n\n**14** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 1 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by country/territory of asylum \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMicronesia\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **15**\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>-<br>3,175<br>81<br>587,708<br>13<br>11,252<br>237,985<br>1,007<br>11,439<br>346<br>200,805<br>18,684<br>3,485<br>-<br>168<br>8,598<br>8,572<br>11<br>-<br>23<br>2,693<br>79<br>198,665<br>3,830<br>982,071<br>254,215<br>6,001<br>184<br>76,263<br>23<br>2,646<br>736,579<br>620<br>537,021<br>614<br>472<br>-<br>165<br>1,115,988<br>36<br>38,188<br>25,561<br>97<br>951<br>1,032<br>12<br>5,844<br>97,787<br>14,525<br>9,906<br>53,961<br>-<br>1,831<br>-<br>34<br>3<br>7,160<br>-<br>1,560|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>467<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>48,017<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>8<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>420<br>-<br>-<br>26,000<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>-<br>3,175<br>81<br>587,708<br>13<br>11,252<br>237,985<br>1,007<br>11,439<br>813<br>200,805<br>18,684<br>3,485<br>-<br>168<br>8,598<br>8,572<br>11<br>-<br>23<br>2,693<br>79<br>198,665<br>3,830<br>982,071<br>254,215<br>6,001<br>48,201<br>76,263<br>23<br>2,646<br>736,579<br>620<br>537,021<br>614<br>472<br>-<br>165<br>1,115,988<br>36<br>38,196<br>25,561<br>97<br>951<br>1,032<br>12<br>5,844<br>98,207<br>14,525<br>9,906<br>79,961<br>-<br>1,831<br>-<br>34<br>3<br>7,160<br>-<br>1,560|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_-_<br>_3,175_<br>_-_<br>_587,708_<br>_13_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1,007_<br>_11,433_<br>_813_<br>_-_<br>_18,684_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_26_<br>_8,598_<br>_8,572_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_11_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_24,280_<br>_3,830_<br>_982,071_<br>_253,970_<br>_-_<br>_4,659_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_635,214_<br>_620_<br>_537,021_<br>_613_<br>_472_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1,115,988_<br>_-_<br>_38,196_<br>_25,561_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_12_<br>_5,844_<br>_98,207_<br>_14,038_<br>_-_<br>_53,961_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_3_<br>_7,160_<br>_-_<br>_1,559_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>-<br>3<br>44<br>920<br>5<br>1,058<br>59,586<br>1,868<br>507<br>358<br>161,863<br>2,287<br>43,883<br>-<br>54<br>264<br>114<br>1<br>7<br>17<br>1,402<br>151<br>4,718<br>6,286<br>47<br>7,053<br>5,149<br>4,760<br>22,200<br>-<br>7,950<br>10,466<br>89<br>32,751<br>1,038<br>327<br>-<br>206<br>2,423<br>3<br>69<br>6,608<br>26<br>60<br>844<br>1<br>13,525<br>47,352<br>1,097<br>1,015<br>598<br>-<br>2,192<br>-<br>-<br>7<br>98<br>-<br>2,601|\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 1 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by country/territory of asylum \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSaint Vincent and\n\n\nSerbia (and Kosovo:\n\n\nThe former Yugoslav Republic\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>4,461<br>-<br>1,519<br>-<br>41,491<br>74,707<br>1,403<br>223<br>61,084<br>1,530<br>46,106<br>149<br>1,610,355<br>1<br>2,671<br>4,797<br>135<br>1,229<br>189<br>16,438<br>598<br>127<br>874<br>283<br>1,996<br>5,135<br>72,763<br>1<br>5<br>-<br>-<br>538<br>14,257<br>43,763<br>2,403<br>3<br>3<br>701<br>235<br>3<br>2,502<br>65,668<br>240,673<br>4,637<br>308<br>-<br>205,174<br>-<br>553<br>114,175<br>57,783<br>149,377<br>2,215<br>76,819<br>646<br>-<br>22,165|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>15,000<br>4,581<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>27<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>35,529<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>56,019<br>309<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>4,461<br>-<br>1,519<br>-<br>41,491<br>74,707<br>1,403<br>223<br>61,084<br>1,530<br>46,106<br>149<br>1,610,355<br>1<br>17,671<br>9,378<br>135<br>1,229<br>189<br>16,438<br>598<br>127<br>874<br>283<br>1,996<br>5,135<br>72,763<br>1<br>5<br>-<br>-<br>565<br>14,257<br>43,763<br>2,403<br>3<br>3<br>701<br>235<br>3<br>2,502<br>65,668<br>240,673<br>4,637<br>308<br>-<br>240,703<br>-<br>553<br>114,175<br>57,783<br>149,377<br>2,215<br>132,838<br>955<br>-<br>22,165|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_4,461_<br>_-_<br>_1,375_<br>_-_<br>_26,491_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_103_<br>_61,084_<br>_1,530_<br>_-_<br>_139_<br>_1,610,355_<br>_1_<br>_246_<br>_-_<br>_18_<br>_58_<br>_32_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_127_<br>_141_<br>_283_<br>_81_<br>_5,135_<br>_72,763_<br>_1_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_563_<br>_14,257_<br>_9,053_<br>_760_<br>_3_<br>_3_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_3_<br>_2,502_<br>_13,112_<br>_240,670_<br>_-_<br>_308_<br>_-_<br>_167,667_<br>_-_<br>_178_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_30,368_<br>_1,545_<br>_76,819_<br>_955_<br>_-_<br>_13,702_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>12,110<br>-<br>1,155<br>534<br>133<br>-<br>275<br>40<br>130<br>996<br>6,436<br>121<br>5,337<br>-<br>713<br>404<br>2<br>558<br>112<br>2,888<br>283<br>54<br>2,552<br>75<br>416<br>13,770<br>203<br>1<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>99<br>2,828<br>542<br>26<br>-<br>5<br>167<br>39<br>-<br>9,587<br>243,948<br>32<br>6,397<br>1,562<br>-<br>4,900<br>1<br>578<br>32,277<br>20,111<br>2,512<br>2,037<br>8,336<br>1,431<br>2<br>817|\n\n\n\n**16** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 1 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by country/territory of asylum \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVenezuela\n\n\nUNHCR-BUREAUX\n\n|- Central Africa-Great Lakes|602,134 11,311 613,445 518,747 29,989|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|33,144 3,225,506 605,968 1,302 211,703|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|4,721,057|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|- East and Horn of Africa|2,410,283<br>35,529<br>2,445,812<br>_2,372,734_<br>84,035|2,410,283<br>35,529<br>2,445,812<br>_2,372,734_<br>84,035|2,410,283<br>35,529<br>2,445,812<br>_2,372,734_<br>84,035|2,410,283<br>35,529<br>2,445,812<br>_2,372,734_<br>84,035|2,410,283<br>35,529<br>2,445,812<br>_2,372,734_<br>84,035|25,340<br>4,473,150<br>223,790<br>20,000<br>54,173|25,340<br>4,473,150<br>223,790<br>20,000<br>54,173|25,340<br>4,473,150<br>223,790<br>20,000<br>54,173|25,340<br>4,473,150<br>223,790<br>20,000<br>54,173|25,340<br>4,473,150<br>223,790<br>20,000<br>54,173|7,326,300|\n|- Southern Africa|134,705<br>-<br>134,705<br>_62,883_<br>294,387|134,705<br>-<br>134,705<br>_62,883_<br>294,387|134,705<br>-<br>134,705<br>_62,883_<br>294,387|134,705<br>-<br>134,705<br>_62,883_<br>294,387|134,705<br>-<br>134,705<br>_62,883_<br>294,387|678<br>60,139<br>-<br>-<br>28,777|678<br>60,139<br>-<br>-<br>28,777|678<br>60,139<br>-<br>-<br>28,777|678<br>60,139<br>-<br>-<br>28,777|678<br>60,139<br>-<br>-<br>28,777|518,686|\n|- Western Africa|237,610<br>8<br>237,618<br>_227,019_<br>10,204|237,610<br>8<br>237,618<br>_227,019_<br>10,204|237,610<br>8<br>237,618<br>_227,019_<br>10,204|237,610<br>8<br>237,618<br>_227,019_<br>10,204|237,610<br>8<br>237,618<br>_227,019_<br>10,204|29,000<br>152,866<br>125,956<br>700,001<br>36,648|29,000<br>152,866<br>125,956<br>700,001<br>36,648|29,000<br>152,866<br>125,956<br>700,001<br>36,648|29,000<br>152,866<br>125,956<br>700,001<br>36,648|29,000<br>152,866<br>125,956<br>700,001<br>36,648|1,292,293|\n|Africa<br>Asia and Pacific<br>Middle East and<br>North Africa<br>Europe<br>Americas<br>Various/unknown|3,384,732<br>3,393,182<br>2,917,652<br>2,001,315<br>515,982<br>-|46,848<br>404,197<br>74,044<br>12,297<br>291,164<br>-|3,431,580<br>3,797,379<br>2,991,696<br>2,013,612<br>807,146<br>-|_3,181,383_<br>_3,001,554_<br>_2,697,514_<br>_866,252_<br>_100,682_<br>_-_|418,615<br>105,051<br>77,215<br>527,659<br>139,948<br>-|88,162<br>10,155<br>8,354<br>275<br>1<br>4|7,911,661<br>2,326,884<br>8,823,240<br>1,228,873<br>5,700,381<br>-|955,714<br>598,228<br>48,485<br>86<br>-<br>-|721,303<br>1,512,460<br>444,236<br>656,835<br>210,034<br>-|331,301<br>285,837<br>4,465<br>96,949<br>33,959<br>-|13,858,336<br>8,635,994<br>12,397,691<br>4,524,289<br>6,891,469<br>4|\n\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>-<br>57<br>924<br>824,381<br>36<br>4<br>358,453<br>3,132<br>514<br>126,055<br>90,650<br>263,662<br>205<br>133<br>2<br>4,685<br>-<br>245,801<br>24,666<br>5,397<br>-|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>200,000<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>-<br>57<br>924<br>824,381<br>36<br>4<br>358,453<br>3,132<br>514<br>126,055<br>90,650<br>263,662<br>205<br>133<br>2<br>204,685<br>-<br>245,801<br>24,666<br>5,397<br>-|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_-_<br>_57_<br>_924_<br>_824,381_<br>_36_<br>_-_<br>_358,414_<br>_280_<br>_514_<br>_-_<br>_68,423_<br>_-_<br>_102_<br>_133_<br>_2_<br>_23,527_<br>_-_<br>_245,801_<br>_24,666_<br>_5,397_<br>-|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>-<br>38<br>233<br>66,574<br>-<br>4<br>30,536<br>5,701<br>117<br>30,571<br>284<br>96,106<br>36<br>-<br>1<br>570<br>-<br>9,397<br>2,333<br>480<br>-|\n\n\n\n**Total** **12,212,863** **828,550** **13,041,413** **9,847,385** **1,268,488** **106,951** **25,991,039** **1,602,513** **3,544,868** **752,511** **46,307,783**\n\n\nUN MAJOR REGIONS\n\nLatin America and\n\n\nSee notes on page 22.\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **17**\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 2 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by origin \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nOrigin **[1]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>2,690,775<br>10,520<br>3,691<br>5<br>10,321<br>49<br>388<br>12,224<br>25<br>9<br>10,914<br>210<br>285<br>10,018<br>67<br>4,424<br>77<br>40<br>313<br>-<br>26,708<br>602<br>22,342<br>168<br>1,002<br>1<br>1,878<br>1,600<br>71,938<br>28<br>13,630<br>11,468<br>107<br>6<br>377,130<br>14,560<br>598<br>205,007<br>25<br>1<br>108,479<br>528<br>11,674<br>1<br>463<br>70,857<br>40,189<br>6,509<br>35<br>10<br>1,349<br>1,155<br>493,286<br>10<br>809<br>43<br>310<br>700<br>13,050<br>9,673|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>2<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>27<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>4<br>-<br>-<br>17<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>3,823<br>33,403<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>288,600<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>1,000<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>208<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>2,690,775<br>10,520<br>3,691<br>5<br>10,321<br>49<br>388<br>12,224<br>25<br>9<br>10,914<br>210<br>285<br>10,020<br>67<br>4,424<br>77<br>40<br>313<br>-<br>26,708<br>602<br>22,369<br>168<br>1,002<br>1<br>1,878<br>1,604<br>71,938<br>28<br>13,647<br>11,468<br>107<br>6<br>380,953<br>47,963<br>598<br>205,007<br>25<br>1<br>397,079<br>528<br>11,674<br>1<br>463<br>70,857<br>40,189<br>7,509<br>35<br>10<br>1,349<br>1,155<br>493,494<br>10<br>809<br>43<br>310<br>700<br>13,050<br>9,673|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_2,581,553_<br>_6_<br>_78_<br>_-_<br>_1,113_<br>_-_<br>_5_<br>_58_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1,664_<br>_-_<br>_4_<br>_115_<br>_-_<br>_18_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1_<br>_-_<br>_26,122_<br>_9_<br>_3,226_<br>_-_<br>_3_<br>_-_<br>_14_<br>_19_<br>_40,811_<br>_-_<br>_156_<br>_680_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_349,695_<br>_16,552_<br>_5_<br>_255_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_94,457_<br>_1_<br>_1,394_<br>_-_<br>_1_<br>_58,893_<br>_13,799_<br>_1,174_<br>_-_<br>_4_<br>_-_<br>_69_<br>_435,988_<br>_-_<br>_83_<br>_-_<br>_13_<br>_15_<br>_210_<br>_276_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>75,414<br>12,432<br>4,622<br>9<br>1,654<br>27<br>101<br>5,422<br>11<br>10<br>3,847<br>27<br>93<br>17,283<br>32<br>801<br>25<br>61<br>528<br>1<br>136<br>178<br>4,509<br>117<br>684<br>-<br>169<br>829<br>17,947<br>19<br>240<br>4,313<br>36<br>-<br>16,247<br>2,747<br>84<br>25,257<br>54<br>9<br>16,118<br>531<br>3,180<br>-<br>73<br>10,703<br>803<br>1,429<br>-<br>1<br>110<br>677<br>73,934<br>10<br>313<br>14<br>922<br>3,057<br>9,049<br>12,269|\n\n\n\n**18** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 2 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by origin \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nOrigin **[1]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **19**\n\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>186<br>285,971<br>352<br>74,481<br>1,115<br>7<br>98<br>177<br>3,448<br>6,835<br>176<br>22,455<br>2<br>94<br>330<br>6,622<br>15,182<br>1,249<br>802<br>38,518<br>-<br>3,338<br>1,208<br>2<br>11,155<br>9,826<br>76,422<br>426,114<br>9<br>1,043<br>68<br>1,506<br>296<br>1,633<br>2,171<br>8,635<br>20<br>990<br>2,345<br>7,705<br>232<br>4,238<br>15<br>16,772<br>3,353<br>-<br>220<br>1<br>295<br>325<br>481<br>31<br>147,685<br>6<br>3<br>34,340<br>85<br>9,401<br>3<br>2,068|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>35,173<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>2<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>4,956<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>27<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>186<br>321,144<br>352<br>74,481<br>1,115<br>7<br>98<br>177<br>3,448<br>6,835<br>176<br>22,457<br>2<br>94<br>330<br>6,622<br>15,182<br>1,249<br>802<br>38,518<br>-<br>3,338<br>1,208<br>2<br>11,155<br>14,782<br>76,422<br>426,114<br>9<br>1,043<br>68<br>1,506<br>296<br>1,633<br>2,171<br>8,635<br>20<br>990<br>2,345<br>7,705<br>232<br>4,238<br>15<br>16,799<br>3,353<br>-<br>220<br>1<br>295<br>325<br>481<br>31<br>147,685<br>6<br>3<br>34,340<br>85<br>9,401<br>3<br>2,068|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_10_<br>_203,184_<br>_1_<br>_41,838_<br>_5_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_3_<br>_42_<br>_775_<br>_2_<br>_10,652_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_63_<br>_166_<br>_16_<br>_-_<br>_725_<br>_-_<br>_105_<br>_3_<br>_-_<br>_19_<br>_704_<br>_12,264_<br>_122,364_<br>_-_<br>_16_<br>_-_<br>_9_<br>_-_<br>_82_<br>_14_<br>_4,148_<br>_-_<br>_43_<br>_297_<br>_3_<br>_2_<br>_174_<br>_-_<br>_10,266_<br>_21_<br>_-_<br>_2_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_5_<br>_-_<br>_5_<br>_138,871_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_26,676_<br>_-_<br>_18_<br>_-_<br>_1_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>72<br>33,330<br>24<br>50,471<br>474<br>4<br>48<br>109<br>5,826<br>7,601<br>78<br>5,103<br>-<br>89<br>37<br>9,632<br>12,240<br>1,407<br>128<br>5,937<br>-<br>6,375<br>1,530<br>3<br>13,684<br>1,037<br>29,050<br>53,177<br>42<br>303<br>105<br>644<br>52<br>1,040<br>1,042<br>2,187<br>1<br>296<br>1,474<br>64<br>67<br>2,730<br>688<br>1,937<br>2,400<br>-<br>74<br>1<br>199<br>4,320<br>352<br>13<br>9,673<br>-<br>6<br>3,655<br>139<br>13,172<br>1<br>1,489|\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 2 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by origin \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nOrigin **[1]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSaint Vincent and\n\n\nSerbia (and Kosovo:\n\n\n**...\u2044...**\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>539<br>1,345<br>57<br>223,676<br>1,144<br>8,120<br>63<br>20<br>1,536<br>706<br>32,223<br>14<br>13<br>26<br>32,782<br>1<br>96,658<br>105<br>221<br>100<br>4,768<br>725<br>1,421<br>32<br>17<br>544<br>2,205<br>2,321<br>74,954<br>82,635<br>15<br>711<br>1,535<br>1<br>1<br>20<br>600<br>21,801<br>48,786<br>26<br>5,309<br>67<br>-<br>230<br>118<br>61<br>1,080,788<br>424<br>508,454<br>55<br>123,027<br>657,795<br>17<br>109<br>16<br>15<br>3,017,498<br>685|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>256,030<br>-<br>2<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>9,615<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>143,179<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>4<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>303<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>99<br>-<br>1<br>12,537<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>11,967<br>-|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>539<br>1,345<br>57<br>479,706<br>1,144<br>8,122<br>63<br>20<br>1,536<br>706<br>41,838<br>14<br>13<br>26<br>175,961<br>1<br>96,658<br>105<br>221<br>100<br>4,768<br>729<br>1,421<br>32<br>17<br>544<br>2,205<br>2,321<br>74,954<br>82,635<br>15<br>711<br>1,535<br>1<br>1<br>20<br>600<br>21,801<br>49,089<br>26<br>5,309<br>67<br>-<br>230<br>118<br>61<br>1,080,788<br>424<br>508,553<br>55<br>123,028<br>670,332<br>17<br>109<br>16<br>15<br>3,029,465<br>685|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_3_<br>_31_<br>_5_<br>_214,985_<br>_978_<br>_30_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_657_<br>_8_<br>_27,074_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_3_<br>_144,396_<br>_-_<br>_87,154_<br>_20_<br>_-_<br>_1_<br>_396_<br>_13_<br>_6_<br>_1_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_9_<br>_10_<br>_1,011_<br>_33,793_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_20_<br>_24_<br>_19,360_<br>_7,558_<br>_-_<br>_912_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1_<br>_963,637_<br>_7_<br>_480,755_<br>_4_<br>_2,349_<br>_640,429_<br>_-_<br>_2_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_2,900,855_<br>_66_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>996<br>2,785<br>1,451<br>48,053<br>183<br>3,548<br>28<br>6<br>552<br>482<br>23,818<br>-<br>-<br>8<br>37,150<br>7<br>3,260<br>31<br>168<br>22<br>753<br>771<br>305<br>40<br>7<br>239<br>961<br>1,187<br>26,655<br>9,688<br>21<br>247<br>181<br>4<br>-<br>6<br>278<br>6,124<br>23,844<br>2<br>2,383<br>30<br>8<br>526<br>15<br>13<br>38,739<br>402<br>4,091<br>80<br>16,190<br>33,235<br>33<br>161<br>11<br>1<br>50,545<br>642|\n\n\n\n**20** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "TABLE 2 **Refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced persons (IDPs),**\n**returnees (refugees and IDPs), stateless persons, and others of concern to UNHCR**\n**by origin \u0003** | mid-2014 (or latest available estimates) (ctnd)\n\n\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nReturned\nrefugees **[5]**\n\n\n\nIDPs **[7]**\n\n\n\n\n\nPersons under\nUNHCR\u2019s\nstatelessness\nmandate **[8]** Various **[9]**\n\n\n\nIDPs protected/\nassisted by\nUNHCR, incl.\npeople in IDPlike situations **[6]**\n\n\n\nReturned\n\n\n\nOrigin **[1]**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe former Yugoslav\n\n\nUNHCR-Bureaux\n\n|- Central Africa-Great Lakes|1,049,553|4,031|1,053,584|862,504|126,489|33,144|3,225,506|605,968|-|166,770|5,211,461|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|- East and Horn of Africa|2,638,181|81,212|2,719,393|_2,351,689_|169,494|25,340|4,473,150|223,790|-|53,921|7,665,088|\n|- Southern Africa|33,445|-|33,445|_3,383_|52,150|678|60,139|-|-|73,093|219,505|\n|- Western Africa|349,923|9,649|359,572|_269,864_|82,584|29,000|152,866|125,956|-|36,590|786,568|\n|Africa<br>Asia and Pacific<br>Middle East and North Africa<br>Europe<br>Americas<br>Various/Stateless|4,071,102<br>3,785,810<br>3,699,368<br>318,182<br>212,287<br>126,114|94,892<br>404,197<br>37,967<br>330<br>289,600<br>1,564|4,165,994<br>4,190,007<br>3,737,335<br>318,512<br>501,887<br>127,678|_3,487,440_<br>_2,984,036_<br>_3,228,476_<br>_45,153_<br>_98,236_<br>_4,044_|430,717<br>279,635<br>138,767<br>113,631<br>75,698<br>230,040|88,162<br>10,155<br>8,354<br>275<br>1<br>4|7,911,661<br>2,326,884<br>8,823,240<br>1,228,873<br>5,700,381<br>-|955,714<br>598,228<br>48,485<br>86<br>-<br>-|-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>3,544,868|330,374<br>282,162<br>11,828<br>72,464<br>33,958<br>21,725|13,882,622<br>7,687,071<br>12,768,009<br>1,733,841<br>6,311,925<br>3,924,315|\n\n\n|REFUGEES|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|Refugees**2**<br>1,759<br>241<br>15,066<br>11<br>10,295<br>19<br>336<br>1,368<br>65,900<br>526<br>15<br>2<br>6,688<br>6,343<br>88<br>147<br>1,039<br>4,786<br>146<br>4,957<br>1<br>8,419<br>314,059<br>90,517<br>2,514<br>233<br>19,715<br>20,520<br>105,594|People in<br>refugee-<br>like<br>situations**3**<br>-<br>5<br>-<br>-<br>1<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>1<br>26,000<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>-<br>1,564|Total refugees<br>and people in<br>refugee-like<br>situations<br>1,759<br>246<br>15,066<br>11<br>10,296<br>19<br>336<br>1,368<br>65,900<br>526<br>15<br>2<br>6,688<br>6,343<br>88<br>147<br>1,039<br>4,786<br>146<br>4,957<br>1<br>8,419<br>314,060<br>116,517<br>2,514<br>233<br>19,715<br>20,520<br>107,158|Of whom<br>assisted by<br>UNHCR<br>_5_<br>_12_<br>_1_<br>_1_<br>_3,584_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_34_<br>_15,826_<br>_18_<br>_-_<br>_-_<br>_1,063_<br>_1,144_<br>_4_<br>_2_<br>_110_<br>_15_<br>_1_<br>_362_<br>_-_<br>_268_<br>_220_<br>_90,212_<br>_491_<br>_6_<br>_1,266_<br>_388_<br>_3,656_|<br>Asylum-<br>seekers<br>(pending<br>cases)**4**<br>6,410<br>194<br>7<br>10<br>1,512<br>43<br>131<br>1,738<br>10,252<br>484<br>-<br>2<br>4,381<br>4,444<br>48<br>61<br>993<br>261<br>35<br>1,646<br>-<br>2,385<br>2,609<br>565<br>2,168<br>305<br>41,998<br>4,939<br>225,101|\n\n\n\n**Total** **12,212,863** **828,550** **13,041,413** **9,847,385** **1,268,488** **106,951** **25,991,039** **1,602,513** **3,544,868** **752,511** **46,307,783**\n\n\nUN major regions\n\nLatin America and\n\n\nUNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014 **21**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        20
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**22** UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2014\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        21
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00a9 2015 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees\nAll rights reserved. Reproductions and translations are\nauthorized, provided UNHCR is acknowledged as the source.\n\n\nFor more information, please contact:\n\n\nField Information and Coordination Support Section\nDivision of Programme Support and Management\nCase Postale 2500\n1211 Geneva, Switzerland\n**[stats@unhcr.org](mailto:stats%40unhcr.org?subject=Global%20Trends%202012)**\n\n\nThis document along with further information on global\ndisplacement is available on UNHCR\u2019s statistics website:\n**[http://www.unhcr.org/statistics](http://www.unhcr.org/statistics)**\n\n\n**Cover photo:\u0003** Syrian refugees arrive across the border into Jordan.\n\n\n\u00a9 U N H C R / A . H ar p e r\n\n\nproduced and printed by unhcr (7 january 2015).\n\n##### **www.unhcr.org**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        22
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/53ac702b-828e-336d-a9eb-9ca204753fa4/54aa91d89.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        23
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_101/raw/doc_101_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,248 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **The sea route** **to Europe: The** **Mediterranean** **passage in the age** **of refugees**\n\n\n\n**1 July 2015**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Afghan refugees leave their dinghy and wade ashore in Mytilini, on the Greek island of Lesvos. UNHCR/Jowan Akkash\n\n## **Europe is living through a maritime refugee crisis.**\n\n\n\nEurope is living through a maritime refugee crisis\n\nof historic proportions. Its evolving response has\n\nbecome one of the continent\u2019s defining challenges of\n\nthe early 21st century, with long-lasting implications\n\nfor humanitarian practice, regional stability and\n\ninternational public opinion.\n\n\nIn the first six months of this year, 137,000 refugees\n\nand migrants crossed the Mediterranean Sea,\n\ntravelling in terrible conditions upon unsafe boats\n\nand dinghies.\n\n\nMany more tried, but didn\u2019t make it. In mid-April\n\n2015, 800 people died in the largest refugee\n\nshipwreck on record, highlighting a staggering\n\nincrease in refugees and migrants dying or missing\n\nat sea. This tragedy thrust the crisis into headlines\n\naround the world, and the EU launched a series of\n\nemergency meetings to establish a more effective\n\n\n\njoint response.\n\n\nThese events raise profound questions. Who are the\n\npeople arriving on Europe\u2019s southern shores, where\n\nare they coming from, and why? How can Europe\n\nbest help them, both to alleviate the suffering that\n\ndrives them further from their homes, and to address\n\nits root causes?\n\n\nSix major findings of this report:\n\n\nThe majority of those taking the sea route\n## **1.**\n\nto Europe are refugees, and their numbers\n\ncontinue to rise rapidly. Most people arriving by\n\nsea are fleeing from war, conflict or persecution\n\nat home, as well as deteriorating conditions\n\nin many refugee-hosting countries. EU States\n\nhave a clear responsibility to offer them\n\nprotection, and an obligation along with others\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "to rescue people in danger at sea.\n\nThe number of deaths at sea rose to\n## **2.**\n\nrecord levels in April 2015, then dropped\n\nsignificantly in May and June. While many\n\nfactors contributed to the recent decline,\n\nimproved European-led search-and-rescue\n\noperations beginning in May have had an\n\nimmediate and positive impact. Yet the peak\n\nmonths still lie ahead.\n\nThere has been a major increase in\n## **3.**\n\nrefugees and migrants taking the \u2018eastern\n\nMediterranean route\u2019 from Turkey to Greece.\n\nMore than 85 per cent of those arriving in\n\nGreece are from countries experiencing war\n\nand conflict, principally Syria, Afghanistan,\n\nIraq and Somalia. From Greece, most move\n\nonwards across the Balkans to western and\n\nnorthern Europe. Italy remains the primary\n\ndestination for Eritreans, Somalis and other\n\npeople from sub-Saharan Africa.\n\nAs arrivals increase, reception capacity\n## **4.**\n\nand conditions remain seriously inadequate.\n\nWhile conditions of reception in Italy vary a\n\ngreat deal, serious systemic gaps remain in\n\nGreece. The former Yugoslav Republic of\n\nMacedonia and Serbia collectively offer fewer\n\nthan 3,000 places of reception, significantly\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nbelow the levels of arrivals (19,000 arrivals\n\nin the first weeks of June alone). This\n\nimpacts people with special needs, including\n\nunaccompanied and separated children,\n\nincreasing their vulnerability and risk of\n\nexploitation. This is an emergency situation,\n\nwhich requires urgent attention and far greater\n\nsupport for efforts to handle new arrivals. If\n\nthis situation remains unaddressed, onward\n\nmovement of refugees and migrants is likely to\n\ncontinue on a significant scale.\n\nThe number of refugees and migrants\n## **5.**\n\nentering the western Balkans from Greece\n\nhas already dramatically increased since the\n\nbeginning of June, with over 1,000 people\n\nentering every day, as opposed to 200\n\njust a few weeks ago. They face serious\n\nhumanitarian and protection challenges linked\n\nto the hardship of the journey, the abuses\n\nof smugglers and criminal gangs, and the\n\nincreasing tightening of the borders.\n\nCountries of origin and the international\n## **6.**\n\ncommunity at large need to do better at\n\npreventing and resolving conflicts. Transit\n\ncountries need to develop their asylum\n\nsystems, including reception arrangements and\n\nidentification processes.\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nAs EU Member States and others debate how\n\nbest to respond to these trends, it is important to\n\nplace them in the context of a worldwide rise in\n\nforced displacement, including a sharp increase\n\nin those seeking safety across the sea. Despite\n\nthe significant media attention it has garnered, the\n\nMediterranean crisis constitutes a relatively small\n\npart of the global picture. When looking at the\n\nincreases in the number of arrivals to Europe, it can\n\neasily be forgotten that 86 per cent of the world\u2019s\n\nrefugees are hosted in developing countries.\n\n\nEurope\u2019s response to the crisis on its own shores\n\nsends a particularly important message. As part of\n\nthe comprehensive response needed, UNHCR is\n\ncalling for a bold response in the number of places\n\noffered through resettlement, family reunification and\n\nother legal alternatives. These should be coupled\n\nwith actions to increase intra-EU solidarity and to\n\naddress root causes of displacement.\n\n\n\nIn this exceptional time, Europe and the international\n\ncommunity need to deepen their solidarity with\n\nthe forcibly displaced, notably by accepting larger\n\nnumbers of people in need of protection.\n\n\nThe protection of refugees has been a core human\n\nvalue as long as civilization has flourished. There\n\nare references to assisting those fleeing war and\n\npersecution in texts written 3,500 years ago, during\n\nthe blossoming of the great Hittite, Babylonian,\n\nAssyrian and Egyptian empires. In modern times,\n\nthe 1951 Refugee Convention has set the global\n\nstandard for refugee protection. At a moment of\n\npersistent and new conflicts, its principles are\n\nas important as ever. The Common European\n\nAsylum System is an advanced regional protection\n\nlegal framework and must be upheld and fully\n\nimplemented by all Member States.\n\n\n\n**EUROPE IN A WORLD OF DISPLACEMENT**\n\n\n**59.5 million people worldwide were forcibly displaced at the end of 2014, as a**\n**result of persecution, conflict and human rights violations, the highest level on**\n**record. That was 8.3 million people more than at the end of 2013: the biggest**\n**annual increase ever in a single year. 19.5 million of those people were refugees.**\n\n\n**EU countries hosted a relatively small share of that number. At the end of**\n**2014, the world\u2019s top refugee host was Turkey, followed by Pakistan, Lebanon,**\n**Iran, Ethiopia and Jordan. Lebanon hosted by far the largest number of**\n**refugees by population, 232 per 1,000 inhabitants. Worldwide, 86 per cent**\n**of the refugees under UNHCR\u2019s mandate lived in developing countries.**\n\n\n**Source: UNHCR Global Trends 2014, World at War**\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n### 1. Europe\u2019s growing maritime refugee crisis\n\n\nIn the first six months of 2015, 137,000 refugees\n\nand migrants arrived in Europe by sea, in profoundly\n\ndifficult and unsafe conditions. That compares to\n\n75,000 in the same period in 2014, marking an 83\n\nper cent increase over 2014. That number can be\n\nexpected to increase further in the second half of\n\nthe year, especially during the summer months of\n\nJuly, August and September. Arrivals in the second\n\nhalf of 2014, for example, were almost double those\n\nof the first half.\n\n\nIn the first half of 2015, 43,900 Syrians came to\n\nEurope\u2019s shores \u2013 the single largest group by a\n\nconsiderable number, accounting for 34 per cent\n\nof all arrivals. This follows a similar trend in 2014,\n\nwhen 69,000 Syrians arrived by sea, 32 per cent of\n\n\n\nall arrivals.\n\n\nMost are likely to qualify as refugees, or receive\n\nsome other form of international protection. In 2014,\n\nthe 28 Member States of the EU gave 95 per cent of\n\nSyrians protection in the first instance, the highest\n\npercentage of any nationality, according to Eurostat.\n\n\nThe second and third highest countries of origin\n\nwere Eritrea and Afghanistan, accounting for\n\n12 per cent and 11 per cent of maritime arrivals\n\nrespectively. In 2014, the 28 EU countries gave 89\n\nper cent of asylum-seekers from Eritrea protection,\n\nand 63 per cent from Afghanistan. Arrivals from\n\nother top countries of origin, including Somalia, Iraq\n\nand Sudan, may also be in need of international\n\nprotection.\n\n\nMany have first fled for safety to neighbouring\n\n\n\nCoffins containing the bodies of refugees and migrants who perished when their boat sank off the coast of Lampedusa. UNHCR/Francesco Maltavolta\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "countries, such as Turkey and Lebanon. But\n\nafter years of rising pressure, the economies and\n\ninfrastructure of many refugee-hosting countries\n\nare buckling, making it increasingly difficult for\n\nrefugees to find work, shelter, health care, and\n\neducation. As humanitarian appeals to assist them\n\ngo underfunded, many simply move on.\n\n\nThe lack of legal routes leaves no choice for many\n\nmen, women and children but to turn to smugglers,\n\nat enormous cost and danger to their lives. Before\n\narriving in Europe, many suffer high levels of abuse,\n\nexploitation and human rights violations. Some are\n\ntaken hostage at gunpoint, released only if their\n\nfamilies pay ransoms they can ill afford to violent\n\nillegal gangs.\n\n\nThe majority of those arriving in Europe in the first\n\nsix months of 2015 were men, searching for a safe\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nplace to live and work before attempting to reunite\n\nlater with their families. But they also included\n\nlarge numbers of women and children, including\n\nthousands of unaccompanied and separated\n\nchildren. (See sidebar on unaccompanied and\n\nseparated children.)\n\n\nThe fundamental fact remains that most are\n\nrefugees fleeing conflict and persecution, with\n\nprotection guaranteed under international law. The\n\nMediterranean boat crisis has become primarily a\n\nrefugee crisis.\n\n\n\nA UNHCR staff member helps refugees and migrants to register at a police station in Kos. UNHCR/Socrates Baltagiannis\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 2. Rescue at sea: Tragedy and response\n\nIn October 2013, a boat carrying hundreds of\n\nrefugees and migrants from Libya to Italy sank\n\nnear the island of Lampedusa, killing 368 refugees.\n\nShortly after, Italy launched a historic search and\n\nrescue at sea operation called Mare Nostrum.\n\n\nThis operation contributed to saving thousands of\n\nlives. However, it gradually sparked opposition as\n\nsome countries saw it as a pull factor. The operation\n\nended in December 2014. An initially smaller\n\noperation led by the EU\u2019s border agency, Frontex,\n\nwas put in place, with fewer resources, a mandate\n\nfocused on border control, and with a more limited\n\nscope to rescue people at sea.\n\n\nThis shift did not diminish the number of refugees\n\nand migrants making the crossing. At a time of\n\n\n\ngrowing instability in Libya, and rising pressure in\n\nrefugee-hosting countries neighbouring Syria, many\n\nrefugees felt they had no other choice.\n\n\nDuring the first four months of 2015, the numbers of\n\nthose dying at sea reached horrifying new heights.\n\nBetween January and March, 479 refugees and\n\nmigrants drowned or went missing, as opposed to\n\n15 during the first three months of the year before. In\n\nApril the situation took an even more terrible turn. In\n\na number of concurrent wrecks, an unprecedented\n\n1,308 refugees and migrants drowned or went\n\nmissing in a single month (compared to 42 in April\n\n2014), sparking a global outcry.\n\n\nEuropean leaders held emergency meetings in April\n\nand agreed to triple the funding of their Frontex\nled operations in the Mediterranean (bringing it\n\nto the levels of Mare Nostrum), and significantly\n\nincrease their scope and coverage. This included the\n\ndeployment of naval vessels from several EU States.\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "These efforts are supplemented by many private and\n\nnon-governmental initiatives, including operations by\n\nMigrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS) and M\u00e9decins\n\nSans Fronti\u00e8res.\n\n\nThe results were immediate. In May, the number of\n\nrefugees and migrants drowned or missing at sea\n\nfell to 68, a quarter of the figure only one year earlier\n\n(226). The downward trend continued in June, which\n\nas of 29 June saw 12 deaths, compared to 305 in\n\n2014.\n\n\nThis decline in deaths at sea is an important\n\nachievement, and a sign that with the right policy,\n\nbacked by an effective operational response, it is\n\npossible to save lives at sea. Europe is rising to\n\nthe challenge, as it has done on multiple occasions\n\nsince the end of World War II. Yet there is a\n\ncontinued need for vigilance. Even one death at\n\nsea is one death too many. For the thousands of\n\nrefugees and migrants who continue to cross the\n\nMediterranean, the risks remain very real.\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nthe majority of arrivals were refugees.\n\n\n3.1 The Syrian crisis reaches Greece\n\n\nLarge flows of refugees and migrants are a relatively\n\nrecent phenomenon in Greece, and it has not\n\nbuilt the infrastructure to cope. This has created\n\ntremendous strain on the island communities who\n\nreceive them and on the capacity to deal with\n\nthe influx. In most locations reception conditions\n\nwere already insufficient, and the authorities\n\nface multiple financial, political and legislative\n\nconstraints in responding to the new rise in\n\narrivals. More assistance is urgently needed.\n\n\nIn 2012, Greece attempted to control the\n\nrising number of land crossings by building\n\na security fence on the border with Turkey.\n\nSea-borne arrivals began to rise significantly\n\nthereafter. In 2012, the number of refugees and\n\nmigrants arriving on the Greek islands more\n\nthan tripled from 3,600 to 11,400; in 2014\n\nit almost quadrupled again to 44,000. In the\n\nfirst six months of 2015, that peak has already\n\nbeen surpassed by more than 40 per cent.\n\n\nMost are fleeing the war in Syria. More than 25,000\n\npeople of Syrian origin arrived in Greece in the\n\nfirst 5 months of 2015, concentrated on the North\n\nAegean islands of Lesvos, Chios and Samos, and\n\nin the Dodecanese islands of Kos and Leros.\n\n\nIn April, UNHCR launched a questionnaire to learn\n\nmore about the challenges facing Syrian refugees\n\nin Greece, and released the preliminary results in\n\nJune, based on 670 of a planned 3500 interviews.\n\nThe picture is one of people undergoing a deep\n\nand abiding struggle to survive, and who face even\n\nfurther hardship as they continue on their journey.\n\n\nA child sleeps outside the screening centre at Moria, on the Greek island of Lesvos. UNHCR/Socrates Baltagiannis\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 3. The rise of the eastern Mediterranean route: the shift to Greece\n\nUntil 2015, the rise in Mediterranean Sea arrivals\n\nwas felt primarily in Italy. Over the course of\n\n2014, it received more than three quarters of\n\nall maritime refugees and migrants (170,000).\n\nIn the same year, 43,500 people arrived in\n\nGreece, or less than one fifth of the total.\n\n\nIn 2015, that picture has changed. During the\n\nfirst six months of 2015, 67,500 people arrived\n\nin Italy, while 68,000 arrived on the islands of\n\nGreece \u2013 overtaking Italy as the primary point of\n\narrival, and already surpassing the numbers for\n\nwhole of 2014. This shift attracted growing media\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nattention as tourists headed to the Greek islands\n\nfor their summer holidays, and shone a new\n\nlight on deeply inadequate reception facilities.\n\n\nWhile the central and eastern Mediterranean\n\nSea routes have become comparable\n\nin size, the profile of the people taking\n\nthese routes diverges significantly.\n\n\nThe main countries of origin arriving in Italy were\n\nEritrea (25 per cent), Nigeria (10 per cent) and\n\nSomalia (10 per cent), followed by Syria (7 per\n\ncent) and Gambia (6 per cent). The main countries\n\nof origin of refugees and migrants arriving in\n\nGreece were Syria (57 per cent), followed by\n\nAfghanistan (22 per cent) and Iraq (5 per cent).\n\n\nOverall, the majority of arrivals were refugees.\n\n\n\n**PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF 2015 SURVEY**\n\n**OF SYRIAN REFUGEES IN GREECE**\n\n\n\n\n**\u2022** **The majority of those questioned were Arab (78%) Sunni (87%) men (83%), between**\n**the age of 18-35 (71%). 40% were university educated, and another 46% had**\n**secondary education. Around half (45%) were married, and 44% had children.**\n\n\n**\u2022** **60% said they had previously spent time in Turkey (31% had no reply to**\n**this question), often in hotels and hostels. Two thirds of those questioned**\n**said they had received no assistance there, and the majority had left**\n**because of unemployment, and a lack of financial assistance.**\n\n\n**\u2022** **90% wanted to find asylum somewhere else in the EU, mostly in Germany**\n**and Sweden, for better assistance and employment opportunities. More**\n**than half intended to apply for family reunification once they arrived.**\n\n\n**\u2022** **The majority of Syrians waiting to be registered said they were treated well.**\n**Nonetheless, conditions were very difficult. Almost 20% didn\u2019t have regular**\n**access to a toilet and 70% did not regularly receive hygiene items. 30% had no**\n**mattress to sleep on, more than half had no access to a shower or blankets.**\n\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2015 SURVEY",
-          "confidence": 0.979555070400238,
-          "start": 295,
-          "end": 297
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "SURVEY",
-          "confidence": 0.8801321983337402,
-          "start": 296,
-          "end": 297
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "GREECE",
-          "confidence": 0.5245457291603088,
-          "start": 305,
-          "end": 306
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.9949555993080139,
-          "start": 295,
-          "end": 296
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.8857187628746033,
-          "start": 295,
-          "end": 296
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "SYRIAN REFUGEES",
-          "confidence": 0.9146560430526733,
-          "start": 302,
-          "end": 304
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\n**UNACCOMPANIED AND SEPARATED CHILDREN**\n\n\n**In 2015, 8% all refugees and migrants arriving in Italy were unaccompanied**\n**and separated children. This included 9% of those arriving from Eritrea, and**\n**10% of Somalis: the two top countries of origin. Their situation warrants**\n**particular concern, requiring specific reception arrangements and care.**\n**Most unaccompanied and separated children leave the reception centres,**\n**which raises concerns over their wellbeing and protection. Italian national**\n**legislation offers a wide range of guarantees to unaccompanied children,**\n**but there are shortcomings in its implementation, some deep-seated, and**\n**legislative reforms and stronger governance at central level is needed.**\n\n\n**Unaccompanied and separated children arriving by sea in Greece**\n**face significant challenges due to the lack of adequate reception**\n**arrangements. Due to poor conditions most quickly leave from official**\n**reception facilities. No central authority has been established to deal**\n**with their needs. Despite some improvements since 2013, measures**\n**to protect them remain inadequate and in urgent need of reform.**\n\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "3.1 The Syrian crisis reaches Greece\n\n\nSuch large flows of refugees and migrants are a\n\nrelatively recent phenomenon in Greece, which\n\nhas not built the infrastructure and services to\n\naddress the basic needs of the people arriving.\n\nThis has created tremendous strain on the island\n\ncommunities who receive them. In most locations\n\nreception conditions were already insufficient,\n\nand the authorities face multiple constraints in\n\nresponding to the new rise in arrivals. Greece needs\n\nsupport to be able to rapidly improve its reception\n\nand asylum capacity to match ever-growing needs.\n\nGreece needs more assistance to address these\n\nchallenges.\n\n\nIn 2012, Greece attempted to control the rising\n\nnumber of land crossings by building a security\n\nfence on the border with Turkey. Sea-borne arrivals\n\nbegan to rise significantly thereafter. In 2013 the\n\nnumber of refugees and migrants arriving on the\n\nGreek islands more than tripled from 3,600 to\n\n11,400; in 2014 it almost quadrupled again to\n\n43,500. In the first six months of 2015, that peak\n\nhas already been surpassed by more than 55 per\n\ncent.\n\n\nMost are fleeing the war in Syria. Almost 40,000\n\npeople of Syrian origin arrived in Greece in the first\n\nsix months of 2015, concentrated on the North\n\nAegean islands of Lesvos, Chios and Samos, and in\n\nthe Dodecanese islands of Kos and Leros.\n\n\nIn April, UNHCR conducted surveys to learn more\n\nabout the challenges facing Syrian refugees in\n\nGreece, and released the preliminary results in\n\nJune, based on 670 of a planned 3,500 interviews.\n\nThe picture is one of people undergoing a deep\n\nand abiding struggle to survive, and who face even\n\nfurther hardship as they continue on their journey.\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\n\nA young Afghan girl shelters inside an abandoned hotel in Kos. UNHCR/Socrates Baltagiannis\n\n\n13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nIn 2011, Italy experienced a staggering increase\n\nin arrivals \u2013 62,700, up from 4,500 the year\n\nbefore. After dipping in 2012, the numbers\n\nstarted rising again in 2013 (43,000) and\n\nreached a new peak in 2014 (170,000). This\n\nyear it looks set to break records again.\n\n\nItaly\u2019s Mare Nostrum operation was a remarkable\n\neffort to rescue people at sea, and resulted in\n\nsaving thousands of lives. Nonetheless, it soon\n\nbecame apparent that Italy could not handle\n\nthis crisis alone. With the return of a robust\n\nEuropean search-and-rescue operation in May\n\n2015, deaths at sea have fallen considerably.\n\n\nAttention is now shifting to the situation of\n\npeople once they safely arrive. Significant\n\nimprovements in the identification, registration\n\nand reception systems need to be put in place.\n\n\n\nThe reception system has struggled to meet\n\ngrowing needs, despite a major increase in\n\ncapacity of up to 80,000 places. Conditions in\n\nreception centres vary and places are limited\n\nin comparison to numbers of arrivals.\n\n\nIn 2014, 62,000 people applied for asylum in\n\nItaly. It is believed that the majority came by\n\nsea. Most Eritreans and Syrians, who comprised\n\nalmost half of the arrivals in 2014, do not stay\n\nin Italy (often refusing to be fingerprinted by\n\nauthorities), but instead move further north.\n\n\n\n14\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nRefugees and migrants from Iraq sleep outside of Kos police station. UNHCR/Socrates Baltagiannis\n\n\n15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n### 4. The onward journey\n\n\nThe majority of refugees and migrants coming\n\nto southern Europe do so with the intention of\n\ntravelling onwards. The countries of northern and\n\nwestern Europe, particularly Sweden and Germany,\n\nare perceived as offering more effective protection,\n\nbetter support for asylum-seekers, a more\n\nwelcoming environment, and easier prospects for\n\nintegration. In addition, they are often already home\n\nto members of their families and communities.\n\n\nIn the first half of 2015, Italy saw 67,500 arrivals\n\nby sea. In that time, only 28,500 of those people\n\napplied for asylum. In Greece, an even higher\n\nnumber of refugees arrived with the intention of\n\nleaving. In the first half of 2015, 68,000 people\n\narrived by sea in Greece, yet through the end of\n\nMay, only 5,115 had applied for asylum.\n\n\nThe onward movement of refugees and migrants\n\nfrom Greece requires long and dangerous journeys,\n\noften at the hands of smugglers, through the\n\nBalkans and onwards through Hungary.\n\n\nThe number of those moving through this route has\n\nsharply increased since the beginning of June, with\n\nover 1,000 people crossing every day from Greece\n\nthrough The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia\n\nto Serbia. Many men, women and children have\n\nfaced widespread abuse and violence along the way\n\nby smugglers and criminal networks. Prior to recent\n\nchanges in the law, refugees and migrants crossing\n\nThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia were\n\nnot authorized to use public transport, and as a\n\nresult, they have been walking on the railway tracks\n\nand walking or cycling along the emergency lane of\n\nthe highway, resulting in various tragic accidents. A\n\nnew law allows people to travel legally in the country\n\nfor up to 72 hours after registering and receiving\n\ndocumentation.\n\n\nThe Governments concerned have requested\n\ninternational support to ensure that the protection\n\nand humanitarian needs of the refugees and\n\nmigrants are being addressed, in particular in\n\nthe area of reception, asylum and migration\n\nmanagement. The situation remains critical and will\n\nrequire further support, including through joint efforts\n\nwith the European Union, national governments and\n\nNGOs.\n\n\n\n16\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\nA group of refugees and migrants aboard a dinghy boat approach a beach on the island of Lesvos. UNHCR/Socrates Baltagiannis\n\n\n17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n### 5. The European response\n\n\nAs the number of refugees coming to Europe\u2019s\n\nsouthern border has risen, so has the pressure\n\non EU countries to share the responsibility\n\nto protect them more equitably, and increase\n\nsolidarity among EU Member States.\n\n\nTwo internal imbalances have arisen. The\n\nfirst is an imbalance in arrivals, with Italy and\n\nGreece facing the large majority of all sea\nborne landings. The second is an imbalance\n\nin destination. In 2014, Germany and Sweden\n\nreceived 43 per cent of all asylum applications\n\nin the EU. This is not sustainable.\n\n\nRecent years have also seen growing concern over\n\na third imbalance, in which the industrialised world\n\n\n\nis receiving only a relatively small part of the growing\n\nnumbers of global refugees, whilst less developed\n\ncountries come under ever-increasing pressure.\n\n\nThis has come alongside a rise in anti-foreigner\n\nrhetoric and xenophobia in several European\n\ncountries, including those traditionally welcoming\n\nto refugees. In addition, restrictive policies have\n\nbeen introduced in some European countries,\n\nsuch as fence-building and push-backs.\n\nUNHCR is concerned that such practices place\n\nrefugees at risk, pushing them into the hands of\n\nsmugglers or simply redirecting their movement.\n\nIn 2015, European policy towards refugees and\n\nmigrants is in the spotlight as never before.\n\n\nUNHCR has called on Europe to\n\nfocus on several areas:\n\n\n\nRescued refugees and migrants wait to disembark. UNHCR/Francesco Malavolta\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Saving lives at sea: Continuing a\n## **1.**\n\nrobust search-and-rescue operation in\n\nthe Mediterranean. The historic tragedies\n\nthis past April galvanized a continent\nwide debate on how to meet countries\u2019\n\nobligation to rescue people at sea. The\n\nEU responded with concrete action which\n\nincluded a tripling of funding for rescue\n\noperations. Sharp drops in maritime deaths\n\nin May and June suggest that the response\n\nis working, but the danger is far from over.\n\nDignified reception conditions:\n## **2.**\n\nProviding improved and uniform conditions\n\nof reception throughout the EU. Poor\n\nreception conditions and lack of capacity\n\ncreates precarious conditions, fuels tension\n\nwith local communities, and contributes\n\nto onward movement. This problem\n\nis not new and needs to be urgently\n\naddressed by EU Member States.\n\nEnsuring greater solidarity within Europe:\n## **3.**\n\nImbalances in arrivals and destination have\n\ncreated growing pressure for an EU-wide\n\nresponse to share asylum requests more\n\nequitably. The European Council decision on\n\na relocation programme for 40,000 Syrian\n\nand Eritrean asylum-seekers is an important\n\nstep along the way to finding answers to\n\nsignificant arrivals of refugees on European\n\nshores, and the participation of all Member\n\nStates will be key to its success. It is hoped\n\nthat this measure will be expanded to address\n\nrapidly evolving needs, and the fact that\n\nan increased proportion of sea arrivals is\n\nnow taking place in Greece. The Council\n\ndecision can help to alleviate pressure on\n\nItaly and Greece, but also needs to be\n\naccompanied by a better functioning of\n\nthe Common European Asylum System,\n\nincluding the Dublin Regulation. In addition,\n\nUNHCR has long recognised the importance\n\nof return programmes for people not in need\n\nof international protection to preserve the\n\nintegrity of asylum systems, and this should\n\nbe done in line with fundamental rights and\n\nrespect for the principle of non-refoulement.\n\nIncreasing legal avenues to safety: The\n## **4.**\n\nAgenda on Migration includes a proposal for\n\n\n\nThe sea route to Europe: Mediterranean passage in the age of refugees\n\n\n20,000 more places for resettlement, which\n\nhas received the support of the European\n\nCouncil. UNHCR urges Member States to\n\nmake concrete commitments towards this\n\ngoal, in addition to existing resettlement\n\nquotas. UNHCR is also calling for EU\n\ncountries to provide more places for people\n\nin need of protection through alternative\n\nmechanisms, such as family reunification,\n\nhumanitarian admission, private sponsorship\n\nschemes, and work and education visas.\n\nCollective action in response to the\n## **5.**\n\nglobal displacement crisis: Increased\n\ncooperation is critically needed to address root\n\ncauses of refugee and migrant movements,\n\nsuch as conflict, insecurity, and lack of\n\naccess to education and livelihoods. In the\n\ncontext of forced displacement, finding\n\npolitical solutions to conflicts and human\n\nrights violations, together with increasing\n\ndevelopment cooperation, are critically needed.\n\nFurthermore, major humanitarian operations\n\nsuch as for Syrian refugees being hosted in\n\nthe Middle East, are dramatically underfunded.\n\nThrough more targeted assistance, including\n\ndevelopment initiatives, the resilience and self\nreliance of refugees and internally displaced\n\npopulations could be strengthened, allowing\n\nthem to live their lives with hope and dignity.\n\n\nThese are crucial first steps to deal with the rising\n\nglobal displacement crisis. In the longer-term,\n\nhowever, more will be needed. The rise in forced\n\ndisplacement has become a global challenge, on a\n\nscale not seen since the end of the Second World\n\nWar. It demands a commensurate response.\n\n\nBold thinking is needed to design a system\n\ncapable of tackling what increasingly looks like\n\nthe new normal. It requires a comprehensive\n\napproach, balancing state responsibilities with\n\nregional and global solidarity, and bringing in\n\nnot just those traditionally involved in protection,\n\nsecurity and border control, but multiple actors.\n\n\nIn times of conflict, fences and borders will not\n\nstop people fleeing for their lives. They will come.\n\nThe question facing the international community\n\nis not whether to engage with this crisis, but\n\nhow best to address it, and how humanely.\n\n\n19\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/391a37b3-bddf-371c-ba7b-9c01912a16b0/5592bd059.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_102/raw/doc_102_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **EDUCATION PROTECTS** **THROUGH ALL PHASES OF** **DISPLACEMENT**\n\n**During emergency and transition phases**,\neducational programming can provide:\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Stability, a sense of normalcy and hope\nfor children and youth who were already\nparticipating in educational programming at\nhome\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Meaningful, predictable learning and\nrecreational activities for children and youth\nwho never had the opportunity to participate in\neducational programming prior to displacement\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Content, language and experiential knowledge\nrequired for access to full-cycle formal\neducation systems for previously, intermittently\nand never-educated children and youth\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Safe spaces and supervision that parents and\ncaregivers can trust\n\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Psychosocially sensitive programming that\nhelps children and youth better cope with their\nchanged environments and circumstances\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Life skills education that addresses selfprotection from sexual abuse, economic\nexploitation, recruitment in armed groups,\nhygiene, health, and local safety and security\nissues that can be life-saving for children, youth\nand their families.\n\n\n**During the stabilization phase and beyond**,\neducational programming can specifically support\nprotection by providing opportunities for expanding\nor developing academic competencies that allow\nchildren and youth to remain in formal education\nuntil durable solutions are identified. The longer\na child, adolescent or young adult stays in quality,\nprotective formal or professional educational\nprogramming, the less risk there is for:\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Early marriage\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Early child birth\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007SGBV\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Child labour\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Domestic slavery\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Transactional sex\n\n\n\u00e8 Military and gang recruitment\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Substance abuse\n\n\nQuality, protective education also helps children\nand young people to develop:\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Social competencies that open doors for\nengaging with civil society in both displacement\nand durable solutions contexts, with knowledge,\nskills and responsibilities that expand and\ndeepen over time\n\n\n\u00e8 Preparedness for acquiring livelihoods skills\nand knowledge that can improve opportunities\nfor employment, self-sufficiency or communitybuilding in displacement and upon return,\nintegration or re-settlement\n\n\n\u00e8 Rights awareness so children, youth and their\nfamilies understand better how to claim their\nlegal rights and advocate for appropriate\nprotection.\n\n\n\nEDUCATION AND PROTECTION **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**DID YOU KNOW THAT . . .**\n\n**\u2022 \u0007** if all students in low-income countries left school with basic reading skills, there would be a 12%\ndecrease in world poverty? [1]\n\n**\u2022 \u0007** in countries where access to education is equal for girls and boys, the per capita income is 23% higher?\n\n**\u2022 \u0007** there would be 14% fewer child marriages if all girls completed primary education and 64% fewer early\nmarriages if all young women completed secondary education?\n\n**\u2022 \u0007** if all women received primary education there would be a 15% reduction in child deaths from\npneumonia, diarrhea and malaria and that if they received a secondary education, there would be a\n49% reduction?\n\n**\u2022 \u0007** mothers living in poverty who complete primary school are 4% more likely to provide their children with\nnutrition that ensures their growth will not be stunted and that if the mothers completed secondary\neducation the percentage rises to 26%?\n\n#### **PROTECTION OF REFUGEES THROUGH INCLUSION** **IN NATIONAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS**\n\n\n\nCurrent estimates suggest that two-thirds of the\nworld\u2019s refugee populations live in protracted\ndisplacement situations. In such contexts, refugees\noften face protection and human rights challenges\nincluding confinement to camps, restricted\nmovement or difficulties in availing of services in\nurban areas. Refugees may be unable to access the\nfull cycle of education, earn livelihoods, or develop\nsufficient resilience for self-reliance or meaningful\nparticipation in civil society. In some situations,\nrefugees may become dependent on international\nassistance to fulfill basic needs, including education.\nUNHCR\u2019s Policy on Alternatives to Camps addresses\nthe reality of protraction and the need to provide\nopportunities for refugees in post-emergency phase\noperations that support social cohesion, resilience\nand self-reliance.\n\n\nThe implications of this Policy for education are\ntwofold:\n\n\n1 It is essential to establish or connect with\nexisting outreach and referral mechanisms so\nthat refugees are aware of and supported to\n\n\n1 All statistics presented here come from the _Education for All_\n\n_Global Monitoring report_ :\n\nhttp://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002231/223115e.pdf\n\n\n\nfully engage in educational opportunities, and\ntheir participation in educational programming\nis monitored appropriately. In the best-case\nscenario, and in accordance with UNHCR\npolicy as it is reflected in its Education Strategy,\nrefugees share the same rights to education and\naccess to national education programmes at all\nlevels that nationals do. In such a scenario, all\neducation partners are prepared to support the\nenrolment and retention of refugee children,\nyouth and young adults in national education\nsystems rather than in refugee-exclusive systems\nthat are not sustainable, require considerable\nannual investment that is rarely available, are not\nappropriately monitored or able to guarantee\ntimely certification that can lead to continued\neducation during asylum or any of the durable\nsolutions scenarios.\n\n\n\u0007Education in Emergencies response protocols\nare not yet consistently geared to prioritize\nrefugee inclusion in national education systems\nwhen possible, or to prioritize programming\nduring the emergency phase that will ease\nrefugee inclusion into national systems from the\nstabilization phase forward. Such programming\nneeds to be designed for the particular\nconstraints specific populations face, such as the\nneed for intensive language or literacy training,\n\n\n\nEDUCATION AND PROTECTION **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "catch-up classes or accelerated education. It\nis necessary for UNHCR, in collaboration with\ngovernment officials, to orient planning and\nbudgeting that will contribute to medium to\nlong-term sustainable educational access for\nrefugee children and youth; this collaboration\nand leadership needs to start during the\nemergency phase while emergency education\npartners are active, budgets are at a peak and\nprogramming decisions that have long-term\nimpact are being made.\n\n\n2 UNHCR needs to be active in advocacy with\nand support to national and regional education\nauthorities so that refugee students are included\nin education planning processes at country\nlevel and their progress in formal education\nis included in national education information\nsystems. In collaboration with appropriate\nsectors of Ministries of Education, UNICEF\nand UNESCO national programmes, UNHCR\ncan support national programming that draws\nattention to increased needs in areas where\nrefugees live, as well as the planning, budgeting\nand national donor advocacy required to\naddress those needs. Humanitarian funding\nthat supports sustainable inclusion and shared\naccess to education for refugees and host\ncommunities in regions or urban areas that\nare frequently underserved by government\nservices can increase refugee participation in\neducational programming and mitigate known\nprotection risks for out of school children\nand youth, and also contribute to national\n\n\n\nsystems and social cohesion. UNHCR needs to\nparticipate actively in support of its policies in\nhumanitarian education working groups, but\nalso to be present to advocate with all partners\nat national level to support the right of refugees\nto sustainable, quality, full-cycle educational\nopportunities.\n\n\n\n\n\nEDUCATION AND PROTECTION **4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**THERE IS A RISK THAT EDUCATION WILL NOT BE PROTECTIVE WHEN\u2026**\n\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Girls and boys do not have equal access to\neducation at all levels and are not treated\nequally in the classroom\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Exploitation and abuse take place at schools,\nand when schools lack effective reporting and\nreferral mechanisms for abuse, including an\nabsence of consequences for perpetrators of\nSBGV and other abuses\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Teachers are not qualified or adequately\nsupported to facilitate learning in refugee\ncontexts\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There is no teacher Code of Conduct or\nmechanism to ensure it is monitored and\nenforced\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There are no safe mechanisms in place for the\ninclusion of over-aged children, youth or adults\nin primary or secondary school classrooms\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007The community is not engaged to ensure the\nprotection and security of all students\n\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007The distance between home and school is too\ngreat and poses safety risks\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Cultural issues that interfere with educational\nparticipation are not met with innovative\nthinking\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There is social cohesion tension that isn\u2019t\naddressed by inclusive or peace education\nprogramming\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There is no access to potable water or hand\nwashing facilities with soap\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There are insufficient numbers of gendersegregated latrines\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007School buildings are unsafe and there is no\nschool fencing\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007There is malnutrition and problems with food\naccess, but no school feeding programme.\n\n\n#### **UNHCR\u2019S EDUCATION STRATEGY (2012-2016):** **FOCUS ON EDUCATION AND PROTECTION**\n\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Education Strategy (2012-2016) is\nanchored in a focus on ensuring the provision of\nrefugee education not as a peripheral stand-alone\nservice but as a core component of UNHCR\u2019s\nprotection and durable solutions mandate.\nThe Strategy reflects the essence of protective\neducation. It does this through examination of\nkey objectives that promote the internationally\nrecognized right to education for all children,\nincluding refugee children. It highlights the\nimportance of access to a full cycle of quality formal\neducation as a means to establish knowledge\nand experience in protective environments that\nprepare refugee children and youth to live healthy,\nproductive lives and builds skills for self-reliance for\nany possible future solution scenario.\n\n\nThe Strategy\u2019s six actions are supported by four\nstrategic approaches:\n\n\n\nA\n**Partnerships will ensure quality and**\n**protective education for refugee children and**\n**young people:** _How you plan and who you plan_\n_with matters._\n\n\nProgramming that supports host country Ministries\nof Education to accommodate refugee learners has\ngreater potential to provide refugees with full-cycle\naccess to existing, functioning education systems.\nIt also enhances social cohesion through the\ninclusion of refugee learners in national systems\nand by supporting whole systems that benefit both\nlocal and refugee children. UNICEF is a key partner\nthat can join UNHCR in working with the most\nvulnerable in both refugee and host communities\nin the frequently underserved areas where refugees\nare found.\n\n\n\nEDUCATION AND PROTECTION **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "B\n**Capacity development of UNHCR personnel**\n**and of partners will improve education**\n**programme management:** _How well UNHCR_\n_staff and partners understand what quality,_\n_protective education looks like matters._\n\n\nWith the right set of skills and tools to effectively\nprioritise, plan, implement, monitor and evaluate\neducation programming in line with global policy\ndirections and national education sector plans, the\nquality of education can significantly improve so\nthat it is protective and enabling.\n\n\nC\n**Measuring progress will strengthen learning**\n**results:** _How well you collect data and what kind_\n_of data you collect matters._\n\n\nPlanning without appropriate data means that\neducation programme budgets often try to solve\nthe same problems year after year with fewer and\nfewer resources. This is frequently due to the fact\nthat measurement focuses on outputs like numbers\nof learners enrolled, or numbers of classrooms built\nrather than outcomes like learning achievement\n\n\n\nand attainment. Data collection and monitoring\ncan help promote learning and this is central to\nachieving the overarching goal of promoting quality\nand protective education for refugees.\n\n\nD\n**Innovative Use of Technology will Expand**\n**Education Opportunities:** _How you look at_\n_recurrent issues in educational programming_\n_matters._\n\n\nIf an operation is facing recurrent problems\nsuch as elevated grade four drop-out, or poor\nfemale attendance and completion, chances\nare the standard response to the problem is\nnot appropriately aligned to the context. This\nmeans that the problem needs to be approached\ninnovatively. Innovation not only refers to\ntechnology; it more generally means looking\noutside the box and identifying new ways of\naddressing old problems, for instance through\nnew partnerships, new pedagogies, new ways of\nlooking at teacher training, and new approaches\nand methodologies such as human-centered\ndesign.\n\n\n# **\u201c**\n\n\n\n_\u0007Education can provide protection, but only when schools are physically safe, psychologically and_\n_emotionally healing, and cognitively transformative.\u201d_\n\n\n_Refugee Education: A Global Review (2011)_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/67d05282-80fc-3ce5-8e58-326615e0ab02/560be0dd6.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_103/raw/doc_103_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,394 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**GLOBAL COMMITMENTS**\n\n\nSeveral global commitments support refugee access to education and can be used for advocacy\npurposes. These include:\n\n\n  - \u0007The [1951 Convention on Refugees guarantees the right to education for refugees.](http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html)\n\n  - [Article 22 of the](http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Rights_overview.pdf) **Convention on the Rights of the Child** secures the provision of education for\nrefugee children and access to national systems.\n\n  - **Sustainable Development Goal #4** _\u2018To ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong_\n_learning for all by 2030\u2019_ policy documents, the [Incheon Declaration and the](https://en.unesco.org/world-education-forum-2015/incheon-declaration) **Framework for Action**,\ncommit to developing more inclusive, responsive and resilient education systems to meet the needs\nof children, youth and adults affected by conflict and crisis, including internally displaced persons and\nrefugees.\n\n\n  - \u0007UNHCR\u2019s Division of International Protection has complementary [Education,](http://www.unhcr.org/5149ba349.html) [Child Protection and](http://www.unhcr.org/50f6cf0b9.pdf)\n[Sexual and Gender Based Violence Global](http://www.unhcr.org/4e1d5aba9.pdf) **Strategies** that provide a comprehensive protective\nframework for refugees, with a focus on children and youth.\n\n### **UNDERSTANDING OOSC AND CHILDREN AT-RISK**\n\n\n**UNHCR employs the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) definitions for OOSC:**\n\n\n\n1 Children who\nhave **no access**\nto education.\n\n\n\n2 Children who have\naccess to a school\nbut are **not enrolled** .\n\n\n\n3 Children who are\nenrolled in school\nbut **do not attend**\n**regularly** .\n\n\n\n4 Children who\nhave **dropped out**\nof school.\n\n\n\n**Depending on the context, the following groups**\n**of children may be particularly at risk:**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children engaged in child labour, including\ndomestic labour\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children with disabilities\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children who have experienced trauma\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Separated or unaccompanied children\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Orphans or children in child-headed or femaleheaded households\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children associated with armed groups, or child\nsoldiers\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children who are married, pregnant girls or\nyoung mothers\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Children who belong to minority groups\n\n\n\n**Refugee children and youth are often excluded**\n**from school due to:**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Exclusionary legal or policy frameworks\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Missing identity-related documentation required\nfor school enrollment or examination eligibility\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Language barriers\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 Being over-age\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Limited or insufficient number of schools\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Discrimination and bullying\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Gender attitudes\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Early pregnancy and/or marriage\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Poverty and child labour\n\n\n\nOUT-OF-SCHOOL CHILDREN IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **DATA AND ASSESSMENTS** **FOR OOSC**\n\nWhile significant progress has been made towards\nglobal OOSC enrolment targets since 2000,\nUNESCO\u2019s Institute of Statistics (UIS) reports the\ndecline in OOSC figures has slowed since 2005.\nGlobal data from 2014 suggests that 58 million\nchildren between the ages of 6 and 11 years and\n63 million adolescents between the ages of 12\nand 15 years do not have access to education. [2] If\ncurrent trends continue, 43% of OOSC \u2013 15 million\ngirls and 10 million boys \u2013 are likely to never enroll\nin school. [3] Furthermore, **over one-third of the**\n**world\u2019s out-of-school primary aged population**\n**lives in conflict-affected states** . [4] Children affected\nby conflict are more likely to be displaced either in\ntheir home countries or as refugees, which has a\ndirect effect on school attendance and completion.\nRefugee children are not included in global\nstatistics, though UNHCR continues to advocate for\ntheir inclusion.\n\n\nRefugee children have unique educational needs.\nJoint assessments conducted with government\nand education partners will clarify real, rather than\nperceived, reasons refugee children and youth may\nbe out of school, and establish strategic approaches\nto addressing their needs. It is possible to generally\ncalculate refugee participation in educational\nprogramming through enrolment data provided\nby partners, but **it is critical to conduct an**\n**assessment to understand the specific barriers**\n**refugee OOSC face in each displacement**\n**context.**\n\n\nAssessments should be **inclusive** and ensure\nconsideration of all children regardless of age,\ngender, or disability, and should capture a **range**\n**of ages** that include early childhood to tertiary\neducation needs. Assessments should adopt both\n**quantitative and qualitative** methodologies,\nincluding surveys, key informant interviews and\nfocus group discussions. Assessment teams\nshould be comprised of both **men and women**,\nand also include **the refugee community** from\n\n\n2 http://www.unicef.org/education/bege_61659.html.\n\n\n3 http://goo.gl/HgSlIq (2014).\n\n\n\nplanning through results stages. Staff or partners\nconducting assessments should be guided to\nfacilitate discussions that do not raise unrealistic\nexpectations of communities.\n\n#### **Assessment tools**\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 **ProGres:** UNHCR\u2019s registration database\n_proGres_ provides age and gender\ndisaggregated data for registered refugees\nof all ages. It is important that registration\nteams capture educational history (last school\ngrade level completed; highest education\nqualification), and that age-and gendersegregated data is pulled from _proGres_ to\ncalculate possible Net Enrolment Rates (NER),\nGross Enrolment Rates (GER), and the likely\nnumber of over-aged children who require\nprimary school access. Comparing existing\nenrolment data to registration data can also\nprovide a preliminary OOSC estimate.\n\n\n\n4 UNESCO (2015). _EFA Global Monitoring Report: Education for All 2000-2015: Achievements and Challenges_ . Paris: UNESCO.\n\n\nOUT-OF-SCHOOL CHILDREN IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Global data",
-          "confidence": 0.9431265592575073,
-          "start": 50,
-          "end": 52
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.8553785681724548,
-          "start": 23,
-          "end": 24
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.9670063257217407,
-          "start": 53,
-          "end": 54
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "global\nstatistics",
-          "confidence": 0.9777845144271851,
-          "start": 187,
-          "end": 189
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8365671038627625,
-          "start": 191,
-          "end": 192
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.5868939757347107,
-          "start": 187,
-          "end": 188
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Refugee children",
-          "confidence": 0.9447782635688782,
-          "start": 181,
-          "end": 183
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "enrolment data",
-          "confidence": 0.8257821202278137,
-          "start": 254,
-          "end": 256
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Refugee children",
-          "confidence": 0.6184567213058472,
-          "start": 181,
-          "end": 183
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ProGres",
-          "confidence": 0.5480952262878418,
-          "start": 441,
-          "end": 442
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "age and gender\ndisaggregated data",
-          "confidence": 0.8472430109977722,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 457
-        },
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "registration database",
-          "confidence": 0.5910618305206299,
-          "start": 448,
-          "end": 450
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.875763475894928,
-          "start": 445,
-          "end": 446
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "registered refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9139724969863892,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "_proGres_",
-          "confidence": 0.9681851863861084,
-          "start": 450,
-          "end": 451
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "age and gender\ndisaggregated data",
-          "confidence": 0.8437756896018982,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 457
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "registered refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9369665384292603,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "_EFA Global Monitoring Report",
-          "confidence": 0.6880122423171997,
-          "start": 545,
-          "end": 549
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNESCO",
-          "confidence": 0.9663653373718262,
-          "start": 540,
-          "end": 541
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Global",
-          "confidence": 0.6325658559799194,
-          "start": 546,
-          "end": 547
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.9451772570610046,
-          "start": 542,
-          "end": 543
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2000-2015",
-          "confidence": 0.9780334830284119,
-          "start": 553,
-          "end": 554
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00e8 \u00e8 **\u0007Secondary data review:** Existing assessments\nby UNHCR, sister agencies and partners,\nincluding child protection partners that examine\nthe level of educational participation amongst\nrefugees and host community students, and\nidentify persistent issues, including quality\nissues, related to local or refugee-specific\naccess and retention.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007The **Joint Education Needs Assessments**,\nproduced by the Global Education Cluster,\nconsolidates the information needed to make\nprogrammatic decisions in the early phases of\nan emergency. These assessments may capture\nlimited information on OOSC and may be more\nappropriate for a sudden onset emergency.\nSubsequent in-depth assessments may be\nnecessary.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007The **Child Protection Rapid Assessment**\n**Toolkit** produced by the Global Protection\nCluster captures the linkages between\nprotection concerns and low education\nenrollment and attendance.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007The **Global Out Of School Children Initiative**\n**(OOSCI)** is a partnership between UNICEF\nand UNESCO Institute of Statistics that serves\nto improve data, analysis and create detailed\nOOSC profiles. If UNICEF and UNESCO at\ncountry-level are planning to conduct an **OOSCI**\n**national assessment**, UNHCR should advocate\nfor the inclusion of refugee children.\n\n#### **Programming Interventions to** **Consider for OOSC in Refugee Settings**\n\n\nUsing the assessment outcomes, **specific targeted**\n**interventions should be designed to establish**\n**or increase enrollment of OOSC** in appropriate\neducational programmes, with elements that\nsupport them to stay in school. Interventions should\nrespond to educational access and quality, and\nshould promote safe learning environments.\n\n\nBelow are a **few examples of some common**\n**interventions** . This is not an exhaustive list. It\nis important that interventions are designed\nand contextualized for each individual refugee\ncontext, and are accompanied by sufficient budget\nallocation.\n\n\n#### **Ensuring access to education:** **Advocacy at national level**\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Negotiate with education authorities to waive\nschool fees for national schools, to provide\neducation programmes that accommodate\nthe special needs of refugee OOSC and\nrecognition of prior learning through\nplacement tests.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Establish robust data management systems\nand/or work with national partners to ensure\nthat Education Monitoring Information Systems\n(EMIS) capture education statistics for refugee\nchildren, and establish appropriate funding\nallocations in national education plans for\nregions where refugee populations live.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Advocate for certification of education\nprograms by the Ministry of Education. Children\nand youth need education that is certified,\nproviding opportunities to participate in\nsecondary education and beyond.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Promote the creation of education programs\nfor all ages including early childhood, primary/\nbasic, accelerated, secondary, tertiary, nonformal and adult.\n\n#### **Ensuring access to education at family** **and community levels**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Establish referral mechanisms and/or specialized\nservices such as refugee information networks\nthat provide information about how to access\neducation services.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Launch livelihoods activities for parents,\neducation grants or other sustainable direct\nassistance that may support vulnerable families\nand cover education costs, such as uniforms,\nmaterials or registration fees.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Work with communities to support identification\nof OOSC and monitoring attendance of refugee\nboys, girls, at-risk children and vulnerable\ngroups.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Involve communities in identifying at-risk\nchildren, and facilitate community participation\nin planning, designing, monitoring and\nassessing educational activities.\n\n\n\nOUT-OF-SCHOOL CHILDREN IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Needs Assessments**",
-          "confidence": 0.9843838214874268,
-          "start": 65,
-          "end": 69
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "agencies",
-          "confidence": 0.6078834533691406,
-          "start": 17,
-          "end": 18
-        },
-        "producer": {
-          "text": "Cluster,\nconsolidates",
-          "confidence": 0.927344560623169,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 78
-        },
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Cluster",
-          "confidence": 0.9273806810379028,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 76
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "community students, and\nidentify",
-          "confidence": 0.6646044254302979,
-          "start": 36,
-          "end": 41
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": null
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Protection Rapid Assessment*",
-          "confidence": 0.7849069237709045,
-          "start": 126,
-          "end": 130
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": {
-          "text": "Cluster,\nconsolidates",
-          "confidence": 0.7158116698265076,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 78
-        },
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Cluster",
-          "confidence": 0.6946245431900024,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 76
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": null
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Global Out Of School Children Initiative",
-          "confidence": 0.5568464398384094,
-          "start": 161,
-          "end": 167
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "national assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.6762783527374268,
-          "start": 217,
-          "end": 219
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee children",
-          "confidence": 0.982426643371582,
-          "start": 229,
-          "end": 231
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Monitoring Information Systems\n(",
-          "confidence": 0.9149462580680847,
-          "start": 438,
-          "end": 442
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": ")",
-          "confidence": 0.949311375617981,
-          "start": 443,
-          "end": 444
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "children,",
-          "confidence": 0.9811887145042419,
-          "start": 449,
-          "end": 451
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Start sensitization activities that respond to\nmisconceptions or information gaps. Examples\ninclude targeted sensitization on girls\u2019\neducation, early marriage or child labor.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Identify education champions who can work\nwith community members of influence such as\nreligious leaders to promote school attendance\nand achievement.\n\n#### **Ensuring education quality and** **protection at school level**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Provide teacher training and professional\nsupport to build basic teaching skills for\nunqualified teachers and amplified skills for\ntrained teachers in areas such as classroom\nmanagement, psychosocial support, or\nlanguage acquisition.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Provide language classes for refugee children,\nand the wider community, especially in contexts\nwhere refugees do not speak the language of\ninstruction.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Establish and monitor participatory teacher\ncodes of conduct, school policies that protect\nchildren from violence or corporal punishment\nin school, and programmes to combat bullying\nand discrimination, including Peace Education\nprogrammes.\n\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Adjust school timetables to accommodate\nrefugee children who might work at home or\nelsewhere.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Maximize existing school infrastructure to meet\npopulation needs by using double, girls-only or\nother appropriate shifts.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Identify mentors and role models who can\nincrease children\u2019s motivation, particularly girls.\nTeachers and staff should be representative\nof the student body, and include women and\nethnic minorities.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Provide Accelerated Education Programmes for\nover-age children who have been out of school\nand need to be placed in a level appropriate to\ntheir age.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Facilitate representation of refugee parents in\nParent Teachers Associations (PTAs) and school\ngovernance bodies.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Establish community support for school\nparticipation, for example by encouraging\ncommunity mechanisms that arrange to\naccompany groups of children to school if\nroutes are considered unsafe.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 \u0007Provide safe learning environments with\nadequate WASH facilities, classroom\ninfrastructure, and teaching and learning\nmaterials.\n\n\n\nOUT-OF-SCHOOL CHILDREN IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **Cross-Sectoral Issues to Consider**\n\nSchools are places where sectors can converge\nto meet children\u2019s educational needs. Life-saving\ninformation is critical in refugee contexts where\nchildren are at risk of human trafficking, sexual\nexploitation, recruitment into armed groups and\nother forms of abuse and exploitation. Through\npartners, UNHCR staff can ensure such information\nis shared with children, their families and\ncommunities to protect children in fragile contexts.\nLife-saving information communicated in school\ncontexts about landmines, basic health and WASH\npractices such as safe hygiene and hand washing\ncan benefit all refugees.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 **Child Protection** **[5]** **:** psychosocial training\nfor education personnel can better equip\nthem to identify and support children with\nsignificant psychosocial needs. Establishing\nchild protection monitoring mechanisms can\nminimize violence and discrimination against\nchildren in school.\n\n\n5 Child Protection Minimum Standards, standard 20; CP and Education\n\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 **Sexual Gender Based Violence:** SGBV partners\ncan support operations to consider the genderspecific needs of children, such as safe school\nroutes; gender-separated latrines with secure,\nprivate spaces for menstruating girls; Codes of\nConduct that ensure harassment-free zones for\nboth boys and girls; female teachers and role\nmodels.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 **\u0007Health and Nutrition:** health personnel and\nnutrition specialists can share information\non vaccination campaigns and other health\nservices, and health and nutrition education can\nbe integrated into teaching.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u00e8 **\u0007Water, Sanitation, Hygiene:** WASH specialists\ncan ensure that children and youth have access\nto dedicated, clean, gender-separated latrines,\nhand-washing facilities with soap, and safe\ndrinking water.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/21d56009-4207-3a77-92d2-4f4341d9d1bf/560be1049.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_104/raw/doc_104_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,225 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **WHAT IS CURRICULUM?**\n\nCurriculum in this document refers to the course of\nstudy endorsed, used and examined by the Ministry\nof Education (MoE) in a national education system.\nAccording to UNESCO, _\u2018curriculum\u2019 is a description_\n_of what, why and how students should learn...The_\n_curriculum defines education content, sequencing,_\n_and characteristics of learning experiences,_\n_including methods and resources for teaching and_\n_learning, as well as assessment and examination._ [1]\nCurriculum in many countries is available in a\nnumber of different languages of instruction and is\nintended to be flexible and responsive to regional\nlinguistic, cultural and geographical diversity.\n\n\n**WHAT CURRICULUM CHOICES**\n**ARE AVAILABLE FOR REFUGEES?**\n\n\nThe choice of curriculum in refugee settings\ntypically falls into one of two categories:\n\n\n1 **\u0007Parallel system** - use of Country of Origin\ncurriculum (traditional model)\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Refugees access education in a UNHCR or\npartner-managed refugee camp setting or\nin NGO or refugee community schools and\nfollow their country of origin curriculum\n(examples: Pakistan, Liberia, Tanzania).\n\n\n2 **\u0007Mainstreaming** - use of Country of\nAsylum curriculum (UNHCR Education\npolicy)\n\n\n\u00e0 Refugees are mainstreamed into national\nschools and follow the host country\nnational curriculum (examples: Cameroon,\nLebanon, Iran, Uganda, Yemen).\n\n\n\u00e0 Refugees access education in a UNHCR\nor partner-managed refugee camp setting\nor community schools and follow the host\ncountry national curriculum (examples:\ncamps in Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda, or\nMalaysia urban programme).\n\n\n1 Adapted from UNESCO IBE Glossary of Curriculum\n\nTerminology, 2013.\n\n\n### **WHAT IS UNHCR\u2019S POLICY** **ON CURRICULUM IN REFUGEE** **SETTINGS?**\n\n**UNHCR encourages cooperation with national**\n**education authorities for early adoption and/**\n**or transition to use of the country of asylum**\n**curriculum in refugee settings.** Displacement\ndata shows that close to two-thirds of refugees are\ndisplaced for more than five years, and the average\nperiod of displacement is 20 years. The data\nsuggests that in most refugee contexts, education\nservices need to be provided for at least a medium\nterm. Use of country of asylum curriculum provides\naccess to accredited, supervised and accountable\neducation services. It is generally the most\nsustainable and protective option in the medium\nto long term, ensuring safe access to examinations\nand certification, access to teaching and learning\nmaterials, quality assurance and improved access\nto national education services including options to\ncontinue education at higher levels.\n\n\nThere are, without question, certain advantages to\nusing the country of origin curriculum as shown in\nthe chart below. And it is also true that a transition\nto use of country of asylum curriculum requires\na significant investment of time and resources to\nensure that refugee children are able to succeed\nin the host country system. In some countries,\nchanging the curriculum also means changing the\nsystem, including the structure of how schools are\nmanaged and administered. Nevertheless, in most\nscenarios, **the advantages of sustainable, safe**\n**access to accredited certification and services**\n**associated with national systems outweigh**\n**the benefits of using the country of origin**\n**curriculum** .\n\n\n\nCURRICULUM CHOICES IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Displacement\ndata",
-          "confidence": 0.9930914640426636,
-          "start": 384,
-          "end": 386
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.717263400554657,
-          "start": 322,
-          "end": 323
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9832483530044556,
-          "start": 392,
-          "end": 393
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **THE CHECK-LIST BELOW ELABORATES SOME OF** **THE PROS AND CONS OF EACH CURRICULUM CHOICE:** Country of Origin Curriculum Country of Asylum Curriculum \u00fe [ Familiar language with links to ] \u00fe [ Opens pathway for refugees to ]\n\nhome culture/identity access national schools\n### \u00fe [ Politically acceptable to both refugees ] \u00fe [ Access to examinations and ]\n\nand some host governments accredited certification\n### \u00fe [ Facilitates repatriation] \u00fe [ Quality \u2013 access to curricular materials, ]\n\ndeployment of qualified teachers,\nteacher training, quality assurance\n### \u00fe [ Option when country of asylum policy ] \u00fe [ Monitoring and supervision by MoE ]\n\nbars access to national system for improved accountability\n### \u00fe [ Access to higher levels of education] \u00fe [ Opportunities for social cohesion ]\n\nwith host community\n### \u00fe [ Sustainable investment in ]\n\nenhancement of national capacity\n### \u00fe [ Increased accountability of states ]\n\nto support refugee education\n### \u00fe [ Possibility to access development funding] \u00fd [ No long-term access to ] \u00fd [ Perceived loss of country of origin ]\n\nexaminations and certification language, cultural, religious identity\n### \u00fd [ No access to higher levels of education or ] \u00fd [ Loss of formal literacy in country of ]\n\nemployment due to lack of certification origin language can affect education/\nemployment upon repatriation\n### \u00fd [ No access to curricular materials or ] \u00fd [ Language can be a barrier to successfully ]\n\nprofessional teacher training transition to new medium of instruction\n### \u00fd [ No access to supervision ] \u00fd [ Discrimination and bullying in ]\n\nand quality assurance host community schools\n### \u00fd [ Isolation from host community] \u00fd [ Substantial investment and planning needed to ]\n\nensure successful transition to new curriculum\n### \u00fd [ Long term funding and capacity challenges ]\n\nin sustaining parallel education system\n\n\nCURRICULUM CHOICES IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The following sections provide guidance on how to transition\nto country of asylum curriculum in two common scenarios:\n\n### **A) \u0007EMERGENCY REFUGEE INFLUX SETTING**\n\n\n\nIn contexts where the education of refugee children\nand youth has been interrupted, an immediate\ntransition to country of asylum curriculum is\nrecommended as the most sustainable option\nfor the medium term. Three planning steps are\nrecommended.\n\n\n1 **Recognition of certificates:** Engage the\nMoE, UNICEF and UNESCO to establish an\nequivalency mechanism to facilitate transfer of\nacademic achievements attained in the country\nof origin to the host country system. Establish a\nmeans to keep the community informed about\nthe equivalency process so that misinformation\nand worries about transferability during asylum\nand upon return are kept to a minimum.\n\n\n2\n**Facilitate safe access to examinations as a**\n**short term measure only:** In collaboration\nwith UNHCR Protection colleagues, engage\neducation partners, especially UNICEF, both\nin country and across border, to assess the\nfeasibility of having refugee students complete\nthe current school year from their country of\norigin. This includes an assessment of the\navailability of qualified refugee teachers,\nsufficient materials, and safe access to\nexaminations. Enabling students to complete\nthe current school year will provide a sense\nof purpose, continuity and opportunities\nfor refugee students at an early stage in\ndisplacement. This kind of curricula and crossborder support should prioritize students who\nare in their examination years of the country of\norigin. Cross-border examination arrangements\nshould be considered as a short term measure\nonly.\n\n\n\n3\n**Prepare refugee students for country of**\n**asylum schools/curriculum:** In collaboration\nwith UNHCR Protection colleagues, engage the\nMoE, UNICEF and other education partners\nto evaluate the language and other academic\nsupport required for refugee students to\nsucceed when they transition to the asylum\ncountry system. In the event children and\nyouth do not fluently speak and write in the\nasylum country language of instruction, begin\nlanguage classes as soon as possible. Encourage\neducation partners to provide targeted support\nfor subject matter that will enhance school\nsuccess in the asylum country system.\n\n\nIf the MoE agrees to inclusion of refugees into\nthe national system, and if refugees are located\nin camps, settlements or urban areas near host\ncommunity schools, advocate with the local\nschools to allow children at the appropriate\nages to enrol directly into the national schools.\nAdvocate with school management for the\npresence of a native speaker volunteer in the\nclassroom if language support is needed. In\naddition, work with partners to identify capacity\nneeds of national schools, including school\ninfrastructure, material provision, language\nsupport and teacher training. Orientation and\ntraining for both national and refugee teachers\nand students is recommended to facilitate\nsuccessful inclusion of refugees in national\nschools. From an advocacy perspective, if\nappropriate, focus on the additional funding that\nwill be invested in national systems rather than in\nparallel ones for refugees only.\n\n\nFor over-aged children, consider tailored\nsupport for eventual inclusion into formal\neducation, including accelerated education\nprogrammes.\n\n\n\n\n\nCURRICULUM CHOICES IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**CONTEXT**\n\nFor over ten years, more than 80,000 Sudanese refugee children\nand youth from Darfur followed the Sudanese curriculum in schools\nrun by NGOs in twelve refugee camps in Eastern Chad. Although the\napproach of using the Sudanese curriculum seemed like the most\nlogical approach in 2003 when the camps were established, time\nproved that it was no longer the most efficient or sustainable for\n2012 and beyond. Given the on-going conflict in Darfur, refugees\nwould not likely be repatriating in the foreseeable future. Refugee\nteachers did not have access to qualified teacher training, materials\nwere expensive and difficult to procure, and access to examinations\nwas problematic, leading to many protection and financial concerns.\nIn addition, UNHCR was unable to tap into development funding for\neducation, nor to benefit from the deployment of qualified teachers,\ntraining or the distribution of materials by the MoE. The lack of\nquality control and proper oversight of education delivered in the\ncamps resulted in a parallel education system offering questionable\nquality education that was effectively isolated from the services and\nresources available in Chad.\n\nThis situation described above was exacerbated by severe funding\ncuts to the Chad refugee operation given new global emergencies,\nresulting in rapidly declining basic standards in humanitarian\nassistance. UNHCR Chad thus had to review its strategy and\nexamine more innovative approaches of engaging the national\nsystem, development partners, and the refugee community in\nmeeting protection needs. For the education sector, this meant\nassessing how to harmonize refugee education in the East with\nthe national system, as was already the case for refugees from the\nCentral African Republic (CAR) in the South. Fortunately, Chad has\na bilingual curriculum (French/Arabic), which meant that students\ncould continue learning in Arabic.\n\n\n**CHALLENGES**\n\nBut change is difficult: After more than ten years of an entrenched\nparallel education system, the challenges confronting UNHCR were\nmany. How would refugees transition from an Anglophone to a\nFrancophone education system? How would equivalency between\nthe two systems be established? How would refugees react to\nthe Chadian system which did not include Islamic studies as the\nSudanese system, or their history and geography? What resources\nwould be required to implement a transition? And how would the\n\n\n\nto conduct a participatory assessment in all of the twelve camps.\nThe assessment, conducted in June 2012, consulted refugees\non a possible transition and allowed them to voice some of their\nconcerns. It also addressed questions related to the prioritization of\neducation needs and the capacity of the refugee community. The\nassessment highlighted mixed sentiments regarding a transition,\nwith refugees in some camps favouring a transition, while refugees\nin other camps noted concerns related to certification, education\nquality, a loss of national identity, culture and religion. With the\nassessment report serving as the basis for further discussion,\nUNHCR held a series of formal and informal meetings with the\nMoE, CNARR \u2013 the entity responsible for refugees, UNICEF, UNESCO\nand education partners to present the assessment results, build\nconsensus around a transition and outline the necessary modalities.\nIn support of transition, UNHCR enrolled 167 refugee teachers from\nprimary schools into a professional teacher training programme\nin December 2012. This pool of teachers would later become key\nresources in schools during the transition.\n\nIn May 2013, a workshop co-led by the MoE, UNICEF and UNHCR\nwas held with key stakeholders to elaborate an implementation\nplan for the transition. The workshop included experts from the\nvarious departments of the MoE, including those responsible\nfor teacher training, textbooks and curriculum development.\nWorking groups explored key questions surrounding equivalency,\nexaminations, teachers, school management and structure,\nintegration into national schools, sensitization and materials,\namongst others. The workshop resulted in an Action Plan including\na two-year timeline with key activities and key actors responsible.\nA Working Group was also established to ensure that the Action\nPlan was monitored on a regular basis, and that any issues were\naddressed. In April 2014, a roving team led by the MoE held\nsensitization sessions in each of the twelve camps. In addition,\nUNHCR, UNICEF and UNESCO drafted a joint note outlining the\ntransition, which was subsequently shared with the Sudanese\nauthorities in 2014.\n\nIn October 2014, the transition from the Sudanese to the Chadian\ncurriculum was officially rolled out. Although there was some\nresistance initially from refugees in certain camps, UNHCR and its\npartners continued to work with the refugee community to manage\nexpectations and ensure that education standards were met, and\nthe curriculum transition has been successfully carried out with\nprogrammes running smoothly.\n\n\n##### **RECOMMENDATIONS** **IN CURRICULUM** **TRANSITION**\n\n\n\nKey elements in the successful curriculum transition include the importance\nof cultivating strong partnerships early on, especially with the MoE;\ndetailed planning and resource allocation, and continuous sensitization and\ncoordination with all stakeholders, particularly with the refugee community.\n\n\n\nCURRICULUM CHOICES IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "participatory assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.926405668258667,
-          "start": 419,
-          "end": 421
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "consulted refugees\non a possible transition",
-          "confidence": 0.6019074320793152,
-          "start": 436,
-          "end": 442
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5472105741500854,
-          "start": 350,
-          "end": 351
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "twelve camps",
-          "confidence": 0.8313792943954468,
-          "start": 425,
-          "end": 427
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "June 2012",
-          "confidence": 0.5476139783859253,
-          "start": 433,
-          "end": 435
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9826237559318542,
-          "start": 356,
-          "end": 357
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "assessment report",
-          "confidence": 0.9659283757209778,
-          "start": 515,
-          "end": 517
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "report",
-          "confidence": 0.7698902487754822,
-          "start": 516,
-          "end": 517
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **B) \u0007PROTRACTED REFUGEE SETTINGS**\n\nIf refugees in your operation are likely to be, or\nhave been, displaced for five years or more, an\nassessment should be undertaken to determine\nwhich curriculum and education system is most\nsuited to medium and longer-term needs.\nConsiderations should include the quality of\neducation available, materials, financial and human\nresources, and access to examinations. In most\ncases of protracted displacement, a transition to use\nof country of asylum curriculum is recommended as\nthe most sustainable, cost-effective option.\n\n\nCurriculum transition is a challenging process\nrequiring significant dedication of time and\nresources. Refugee families often resist the\nswitch to country of asylum curriculum, which\ncan be perceived as a threat to language, history\nand identity for their children and communities.\nConsensus on the decision to transition to country\nof asylum curriculum must be built with national\neducation authorities and other education actors,\nand key technical components of curricular\ntransition need to be considered and addressed.\nGuiding principles and key steps towards curriculum\ntransition are outlined below:\n\n\n**GUIDING PRINCIPLES**\n\n\nThroughout the curriculum transition process,\nensure a consultative, participatory process\nthrough:\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Strong partnership with the MoE,\nrelevant national authorities, UNICEF and\nUNESCO;\n\n\n\u00e0 Transparent and continuous engagement\nwith the refugee community including\nconsultation, advocacy and clear role in\nthe decision making process; ensure that\ninvolvement of the refugee community\nextends to a broad range of stakeholders,\nrather than limiting representation to\nrefugee leaders;\n\n\n\u00e0 Regular consultation and communication\nwith key refugee education stakeholders\nand partners.\n\n\n#### **Key steps:**\n\n1 **Assess needs:** This could include review of\ncurrent education data, key challenges in\neducation services, strategic priorities and\npolicy directions for the operation as a whole\nand education specifically, or survey of refugee\ncommunity attitudes and needs regarding a\nchange in curriculum. A needs assessment\nshould also consider the most feasible durable\nsolutions in the short and longer term, including\nresource availability for education over the next\nfive to ten years.\n\n\n2 **Open dialogue with stakeholders:** Initiate\ndialogue on the pros and cons of curriculum\ntransition with key education stakeholders\nincluding the MoE, curriculum development\ninstitutions, education partners (UNICEF,\nUNESCO and NGOs), and refugees. A range\nof meetings with individuals and groups can be\nused at this stage. Use of a SWOT (Strengths,\nWeaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis\nwith partners may also be of use.\n\n\n3 **Build consensus:** Develop a document or\nconcept note outlining the rationale for\ncurriculum transition, including a response to\nanticipated counter-arguments \u2013 Who is likely\nto benefit and lose as a result of a transition?\nWho could be potential champions? How\ncan concerns associated with a transition\nbe addressed? Use this document to guide\nadvocacy and consensus-building around\nthe decision. A series of meetings with MoE,\nUNICEF, UNESCO, education partners and\nrefugee community representatives are\nnecessary. Bear in mind that curriculum can\nbe a very emotional and political issue for\nrefugee communities and national partners;\nyour task is to clearly outline the pros and cons\nof the proposed curriculum transition to move\nstakeholders towards a well-informed choice.\nThis part of the process requires significant\ninvestment in relationship building with all key\nstakeholders and can be very time consuming\nand sometimes discouraging. Persistence and\npatience is needed to finally reach a general\nagreement from stakeholders to move forward.\n\n\n\nCURRICULUM CHOICES IN REFUGEE SETTINGS **6**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.8786939382553101,
-          "start": 35,
-          "end": 36
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8693272471427917,
-          "start": 14,
-          "end": 15
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "current education data",
-          "confidence": 0.7358484864234924,
-          "start": 314,
-          "end": 317
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee community",
-          "confidence": 0.9093127250671387,
-          "start": 239,
-          "end": 241
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "4\n**Develop an implementation plan, timeline**\n**and budget:** Hold a consultative workshop with\nrepresentatives from all stakeholders, including the\nrefugee community, to develop an implementation\nplan. Ideally the planning workshop should be\nco-hosted by the MoE, UNICEF, UNESCO and\nUNHCR. The planning meeting should break\ndown implementation of the curriculum transition\ninto key stages with activities and an expected\ntimeline. A budget should also be developed,\nwith agreement from partners on cost-sharing\noptions. Working groups may need to be formed\nto assess needs and develop recommendations\nand detailed workplans around some of the more\ncomplex issues listed below:\n\n\n**a.** **Sensitization of the refugee communit** y to\ngenerate buy-in and support for the transition and\nto dispel any misinformation circulating;\n\n\n**b.** **Establishing equivalence** between the curriculum\nin use and the country of asylum curriculum to\ndetermine placement/levels and facilitate crossborder recognition of certificates in case of\nrepatriation;\n\n\n**c.** **\u0007Language support** for students and teachers\nif the curriculum transition includes a different\nlanguage;\n\n\n**d.** **Managing teachers:** Recruitment and/or\ndeployment of **national teachers** to fill any\ncapacity gaps and to guide the transition at school\nlevel. Head teacher and teacher training for\n**refugee teachers** who will be implementing the\nnew curriculum;\n\n\n**e.** **Mapping opportunities to integrate** refugees\ninto national schools surrounding refugee camps,\nparticularly secondary schools. Likewise, consider\nhost community needs and the integration of\nhost community children into schools in refugee\ncamps; assessment of support needed to enable\nschools to include refugees, and negotiations\n\n\n\nwith local authorities on how best to invest\navailable emergency funding for school support\nin infrastructure, materials, etc. while encouraging\nauthorities to ensure teacher support as the most\nimportant component for long term sustainability;\n\n\n**f.** **Seeking flexible solutions** for refugees to\ncontinue learning their country of origin\nlanguage if possible, and provide additional\nbridging classes or a bridging period that uses a\ncombination of language/curricula to transition\nteachers and learners to the new system. Also\nconsider any additional subjects which refugees\nstill want to continue learning from their country\nof origin curriculum, such as history, geography\nor religious classes. This can be organized by the\ncommunity in the form of after school classes;\n\n\n**g.** **\u0007Integrating refugee education into national**\n**education** development plans and structures;\n\n\n**h.** **Budget** for the additional, up-front investments\nrequired for a successful transition to country\nof asylum curriculum, such as language classes,\ntextbooks, teacher guides and training. Ensure\nthat accurate costing is reflected in UNHCR\nannual plans and budget allocation, and that costsharing options are agreed upon with partners;\n\n\n**i.** **Anticipating possible negative effects and**\n**solutions** to problems like drop-out triggered by\nthe transition, hostile reaction from the refugee\ncommunity, etc.\n\n\n5 **Agree on leadership and responsibilities:** Ensure\nthat the implementation plan is followed up by\nspecific focal points and is regularly monitored by a\nworking group, or a particular agency \u2013 preferably\nthe MoE. Include refugee representatives in\nmonitoring the process. Ensure that roles and\nresponsibilities are clear to ensure smooth roll out.\nFinally, be sure to update all stakeholders on a\nregular basis. Communication is key!\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/7a476c47-7ef6-3f27-8f70-cb4199f1349e/560be1209.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_105/raw/doc_105_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/747af36d-cbe4-3674-9e07-d79a81aa9676/560be1493.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**DOES THE NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ALLOW**\n**REFUGEE CHILDREN ACCESS TO THE NATIONAL SCHOOL SYSTEM?**\n\n\n**NO**\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Begin or continue advocacy with national Ministry of Education** and government refugee authorities on\nthe importance of inclusion of children in national systems with emphasis on: international obligations (1951\nRefugee Convention, CRC, SDGs) and potential benefits for national systems (enhancement of national\ncapacity through construction of classrooms, etc.). Highlight the long term challenges of unregulated\nparallel services, including an analysis of the longer-term costs and protection implications;\n\n\u00e8 **Engage advocacy and other support from UNICEF, UNESCO and other education and development**\n**partners;**\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Advocate for access to national examinations** to allow certification of refugee learners, at a minimum.\n\n\u00e8 **Align curriculum, examinations and school systems as closely as possible with the national education**\n**system** where NGO or community-based schools for refugees are necessary, either because refugees are\nexcluded from national schools or because national schools are not available. This alignment paves the way\nfor inclusion in the national system, and also opens the door for official registration and engagement with\nthe Ministry of Education.\n\n\n**YES**\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Plan mainstreaming in close collaboration** with the Ministry of Education at national and local levels, the\ngovernment department of refugee affairs, UNICEF, UNESCO and other relevant partners. Consider the\nfollowing planning suggestions:\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Assess national capacity:** Map national schools that are physically accessible to refugee community \u2013 is\ncapacity adequate to absorb refugee children or are schools already full or overcrowded? If so, at what\nlevels?\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Enhance national system and school capacity to mainstream refugees:**\n\n\u00e0 **Establish system to recognize certification and assess/place refugee students** by academic level\n(avoid placing students in lower levels due to language barrier);\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Establish double shift system or construct classrooms** to increase school capacity;\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Train national teachers** on refugee background and protection needs, including strategies to address\nacademic, linguistic, psychosocial, and social cohesion issues;\n\n\u00e0 **Place refugee teachers/teaching assistants in classrooms** to support with language/translation\nneeds;\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Train school administrators** on refugee education policy, documentation waivers, certification,\nplacement, systems to liaise with refugee parents and community;\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Orient school community (teachers, students, parents)** on refugee background and policies,\npotential benefits of refugee inclusion, and how they can help to support inclusion of refugee learners;\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Promote programmes** that support both national teachers and students, as well as refugee children\nand families \u2013 this could include ongoing training for teachers, academic/language support for\nrefugees, parent meetings, youth and sports clubs;\n\n\u00e0 **Establish mechanisms**, including SOPs, with communities and school administration to address schoolrelated protection issues as they emerge, always safeguarding confidentiality.\n\n\nMAINSTREAMING REFUGEES IN NATIONAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/747af36d-cbe4-3674-9e07-d79a81aa9676/560be1493.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00e8 **\u0007Prepare refugee children and adolescents for mainstreaming in national schools:**\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Assess refugee concerns** associated with mainstreaming in national schools through a participatory\nassessment and other forms of engagement with communities. Findings should inform planning for\ninclusion. Analyse the \u201cwinners and losers\u201d of mainstreaming \u2013 who will benefit and who will not? How\ncan planning address the needs of both groups?\n\n\u00e0 **\u0007Assess language needs and begin or continue language classes** as soon as possible;\n\n\u00e0 **Orient students** on new curriculum, classroom culture, expectations and social cohesion;\n\n\u00e0 **Orient parents and community** on education system requirements, legal obligations, documentation\npolicies for admissions, certification, academic concerns, school liaison systems, etc.\n\n\u00e0 **Ensure language, academic and protection support** is readily available to students and parents\nthroughout transition;\n\n\u00e0 **Ensure that transport, fees and associated schooling costs** are not barriers to access.\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Encourage cost-sharing and technical support to national partners:** Engage MoE, government refugee\nauthorities, UNICEF, UNESCO and other development partners to provide technical and financial resources\nto support the mainstreaming of refugees; ensure that refugee education is accounted for in national\neducation sector plans;\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Planning and resource allocation:** Ensure that costs associated with mainstreaming are included in countrylevel refugee education strategies as well as operational planning; also work towards inclusion of refugee\neducation in district and national education sector planning as well as other relevant planning frameworks\nsuch as UNDAF;\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Monitor:** In collaboration with MoE, establish a system to track refugee student and teacher needs to\nensure successful inclusion and transition, as well as general enrolment, attendance and completion data.\nPeriodically assess barriers that out-of-school children face and try to address them through programming;\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Anticipate repatriation:** Where feasible, promote cross-border recognition of certificates as well as refugee\naccess to additional subjects (country of origin language, culture, history, etc) in preparation for repatriation.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/747af36d-cbe4-3674-9e07-d79a81aa9676/560be1493.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_106/raw/doc_106_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,195 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### \u00fc SAFETY AND PROTECTION FOR\n\n**REFUGEE CHILDREN:**\n\n\nThe presence of untrained, stressed teachers leads\nto poor scholastic outcomes and may also present\nprotection risks in schools. However, teachers with\nclear roles and responsibilities outlined in a code\nof conduct, training and supportive supervision\ncan ensure that schools are safe, protective spaces\nwhere children can regain a sense of normalcy\nfollowing the trauma of displacement. Trained\nteachers can also ensure that children acquire lifesaving knowledge and skills like disease prevention\nand self-protection from environmental risks,\nincluding sexual and gender-based violence.\n\n#### \u00fc [LEARNING FOR REFUGEE CHILDREN:]\n\nIn many refugee settings untrained teachers are\nworking in complex classrooms made up of large\nnumbers of mixed age and ability learners with\nvaried psychosocial needs. Teachers need strong\nsupport if children are to gain basic literacy and\nnumeracy skills required for them to successfully\ncomplete primary education and transition to\nsecondary school.\n\n#### \u00fc PROFESSIONAL SKILLS FOR\n\n**REFUGEE TEACHERS:**\n\n\nInvestment in refugee teachers as professionals and\nas learners is an investment in durable solutions.\nRefugee teachers develop on the job professional\nexperience and skills as teachers, which builds\nhuman capital for both themselves and students\nand lays the foundation for long-term solutions for\nrefugee communities.\n\n\n### **PLANNING FOR REFUGEE** **TEACHERS IN 4 STEPS**\n\n1 **ASSESS NEEDS:** Track and accurately\nbudget for your teacher supply.\n\n2 **RECRUIT:** Standardize and harmonize teacher\nrecruitment and management policies.\n\n3 **TRAIN:** Ensure that all teachers have access\nto orientation, training and ongoing in-service\nsupport according to their needs.\n\n4 **MOTIVATE:** Find ways to support, motivate\nand reward teachers.\n\n##### 1 **ASSESS NEEDS: Track and accurately** **budget for your teacher supply.**\n\n\nIn order to ensure that children have sufficient\nnumbers of quality teachers in their classrooms,\nyou need to accurately track exactly how many\nteachers you have, how many you need now\nand next year, and how much it will cost to pay\nand train them. Although there may be several\nimplementing partners recruiting and managing\nteachers, it\u2019s important to ensure accurate,\ncentralized basic teacher data so that **UNHCR**\n**and partners can ensure sufficient numbers**\n**of teachers are available and that adequate**\n**funds to pay AND train them are factored into**\n**budget allocations.**\n\n\n**KEY QUESTIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Do you currently have sufficient numbers of\nteachers to meet nationally acceptable teacherpupil ratios? How many more teachers do you\nneed?\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007How many more new teachers will you need\nnext year taking projected increases in\nenrolment into account?\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007In which grades is your teacher shortage\nmost acute (or which grades have the highest\nteacher-pupil ratio)?\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007What is your average teacher turnover (on\naverage how many teachers leave per term)?\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007What kinds of teachers do you need most (female\nteachers and qualified teachers for example)?\nHow and where can you get more of them?\n\n\n\nREFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Maintain updated, disaggregated**\n**teacher data.** In your education information\nmanagement system including: number\nof teachers by level (ECD, primary, ABE,\nsecondary), by sex (male and female), by\nqualification (qualified or unqualified), by\nstatus (refugee or national). Also track average\nnumbers of teachers who leave each term. For\nprimary, also include numbers of teachers per\ngrade or by lower and upper primary.\n\n\u00e8 **Calculate teacher pupil ratio by grade**\n**OR by lower primary and upper primary.**\nCalculating teacher pupil ratios for primary can\nbe deceptive because enrolment rates tend to\nbe uneven, with large numbers of children in\nlower primary and decreasing numbers in upper\nprimary. For a more accurate picture of teacher\npupil ratios and to identify where teacher\nshortage are acute, ensure ratios are calculated\nper grade or by lower and upper primary.\n\n\u00e8 **Use teacher data to budget costs of paying**\n**teachers AND training them.** All teachers,\nwhether they are qualified or not need\norientation and training on code of conduct,\ntheir responsibilities and how to manage\ncomplex, refugee classrooms. Unqualified,\ninexperienced teachers require additional\nperiodic training and support to become\neffective teachers. Ensure accurate projections\nfor teacher compensation and training are\nreflected in annual plans and budgets.\n\n##### 2 **RECRUIT: Standardize and** **harmonize teacher recruitment and** **management policies.**\n\n\nIn camp settings, where education services are\nprovided outside of the policy framework of a\nnational Ministry of Education, it\u2019s essential that\nUNHCR and all partners recruiting, managing\nand training teachers come together to establish\ncommon, standardized teacher policies and\npractices. When teacher policies are mixed and\ndetermined by individual agencies, there is a\nlack of accountability amongst both teachers and\npartners, migration of teachers from one agency\nto another and dissatisfaction and confusion\namongst teachers. Lack of transparency on teacher\npolicies, particularly compensation, can result in\n\n\n\nharmful tensions between refugee and national\nteachers. **Use Implementing Partner agreements**\n**and coordination mechanisms to ensure that**\n**partners use standardized, harmonized teacher**\n**management policies and practices.**\n\n\n**KEY QUESTIONS**\n\n\u00e8 Are standardized, harmonized teacher\nmanagement policies and practices in use by all\npartners?\n\n\n\u00e8 Are incentive and national teacher salary scales\nand other forms of compensation harmonized\namongst implementing partners?\n\n\n\u00e8 Are these systems and policies transparent and\nclearly understood by teachers, schools and\ncommunity members?\n\n\n\u00e8 What options exist to strengthen capacity for\nschool-based teacher management?\n\n\n**PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Ensure that all agencies working with**\n**teachers use standard, common teacher**\n**policies and practices** including:\n\n\u00e0 Common teacher recruitment criteria and\nprocess\n\n\n\u00e0 Common teacher terms of reference/\njob description which outlines role and\nresponsibilities, compensation, hours of\nservice, leave terms, etc.\n\n\n\u00e0 Common teacher code of conduct with\nmonitoring mechanisms and protocols\nto address violation of the teacher code,\nincluding confidential mechanisms for\nstudents and families to report problems\nwith teachers\n\n\n\u00e0 Common performance evaluation and\nsharing of results between education actors\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Ensure that teacher compensation is**\n**harmonized between all agencies.** Also\nadvocate for incentive increments that reflect\nthe level of skill required for teachers and\nto recognize higher levels of skill amongst\nqualified and/or experienced teachers.\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Ensure that teacher recruitment criteria and**\n**processes, terms of employment and compen-**\n**sation are transparent and clear to teachers.**\nThis is especially important where refugee teachers and national teachers are paid differently on\nthe basis of legal status and the right to work.\n\n\n\nREFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "teacher data",
-          "confidence": 0.9983189702033997,
-          "start": 18,
-          "end": 20
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "teachers",
-          "confidence": 0.8114699721336365,
-          "start": 33,
-          "end": 34
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "teacher data",
-          "confidence": 0.9970502853393555,
-          "start": 188,
-          "end": 190
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "teachers",
-          "confidence": 0.6013014316558838,
-          "start": 199,
-          "end": 200
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### 3 **\u0007TRAIN: Ensure that all teachers** **have access to orientation, training** **and ongoing in-service support** **according to their needs.**\n\nIn situations that necessitate the recruitment of\nunqualified, inexperienced refugee teachers,\ncommitment to building teachers\u2019 capacity to\nkeep children safe and help them learn in school is\ncritical. Teacher training is a technical area requiring\nexpertise, so reaching out to national partners\nto ensure quality professional development is\nrecommended. **Use these two basic standards**\n**to plan teacher training (remembering that**\n**untrained teachers are a protection risk):**\n\n\n1\n**All newly recruited, unqualified teachers**\n**have access to training in basic teacher**\n**competencies within the first three months of**\n**recruitment.**\n\n\n2\n**All teachers have access to an initial**\n**induction, periodic training and school-based,**\n**in-service support to develop their teaching**\n**practice.**\n\n\n\n**KEY QUESTIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 What is the profile of teachers\u2019 levels of\neducation? Or what proportion of teachers are\nqualified, unqualified but with higher education\ndegrees, secondary leavers, primary leavers?\n\n\n\u00e8 Do all partners use a standard initial training\npack for all new teachers covering these\nfoundational topics: teachers\u2019 role and\nresponsibility; child protection; subject\nknowledge and curriculum; pedagogy?\n\n\n\u00e8 What options for teacher development other\nthan short workshops exist?\n\n\n\u00e8 Which national teacher education partners\nmight be able to provide technical support to\ntrain refugee teachers (MoE, Teacher Training\nColleges, Universities, UNICEF, local and/or\ninternational NGOs etc.)?\n\n\n**PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Assess teachers\u2019 professional development**\n**needs and plan initial induction trainings**\n**according to these needs.** Use data on\nteachers\u2019 level of education and experience\nto plan trainings. Experienced, well qualified\nteachers may only require induction on their\n\n\n\nREFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT **4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "of teachers\u2019 levels of\neducation?",
-          "confidence": 0.6436368227005005,
-          "start": 220,
-          "end": 227
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "teachers (",
-          "confidence": 0.6910508275032043,
-          "start": 311,
-          "end": 313
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "roles and responsibilities and child protection\nin refugee settings, while unqualified teachers\nwill need a comprehensive basic training to\nget them started. Teachers with low levels of\neducation will need special support to build\nbasic content knowledge and skills in literacy,\nmathematics and science. National teachers\nneed induction on the background and rights of\nrefugee learners and preparation for challenges\nthey may encounter including language and\npsychosocial issues.\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Ensure that every new, unqualified teacher**\n**is provided with a common, basic training.**\nDevelop a standard teacher training pack for\nall unqualified teachers which all partners use,\nwhich provides coverage of the most basic\nand essential knowledge, attitudes and skills\nrequired. The pack should cover key competencies in teachers\u2019 role and responsibilities,\nchild protection and well-being, curriculum and\nsubject knowledge and pedagogy.\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Use diverse strategies to continue to build**\n**teachers\u2019 capacity.** Explore methods to support\nschool-based teacher development which could\ninclude: teacher observation, collaborative\nlesson planning, action research. Pedagogical\nadvisors, qualified national teachers and/or\nexperienced or qualified refugee teachers can\nbe used to support school-based development.\n\n\n##### 4 MOTIVATE: **Find ways to support,** **motivate and reward teachers.**\n\nIn many refugee settings, high rates of teacher\nturnover cause destabilization of the teacher supply\nand leakage of investment in teacher training. Low\ncompensation or \u201cincentive\u201d pay combined with\nthe strenuous workload of teaching large groups\nof complex learners contribute to high teacher\nturnover. Teacher motivation however, does not rely\non compensation alone. **While efforts to increase**\n**or provide increments in teacher incentive pay**\n**should be pursued, other measures to help**\n**teachers feel like respected professionals,**\n**participate in decision making, improve working**\n**conditions and support substantial professional**\n**development and certification for refugee**\n**teachers can also contribute to the motivation,**\n**quality and professionalism of the teaching force.**\n\n\n**KEY QUESTIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 What options are available to improve working\nconditions for teachers?\n\n\n\u00e8 What options are available to engage teacher\nparticipation in decision making?\n\n\n\u00e8 Who are potential partners at national level\nwith whom to open dialogue on large-scale, inservice teacher training with options to progress\ntowards qualification?\n\n\n\nREFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Improve working conditions.** Efforts to\nimprove working conditions should be part\nof broader education sector plans, and could\ninclude: provision of teacher furniture and\nteacher packs (basic teaching supplies provided\neach term); provision of teachers guides and\ntexts; use of teaching assistants; use of twoschools-in-one to relieve congestion, etc.\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Engage and involve teachers.** Engaging\nteachers\u2019 participation in education programme\nplanning and implementation brings them in as\nproblem solving partners rather than viewing\nthem as part of a problem. Invite teacher\nrepresentatives to coordination and planning\nmeetings and consult them on a regular basis\nfor feedback and planning purposes.\n\n\n\u00e8 **\u0007Widen access to teacher qualifications**\n**through negotiation with MoE and/or**\n**universities.** Consider the following options as\nexamples of what might be possible:\n\n\n\u00e0 Increased numbers of scholarships to\nteacher training institutions\n\n\n\u00e0 Negotiations with MoE or universities to\nopen teacher training facilities on-site,\nthrough distance learning or mobile units\n\n\n\u00e0 Negotiations with MoE or universities to\nallow for stackable credit for on-site, short\nterm training or courses which can lead to\nqualification\n\n\n\n**NATIONAL TEACHERS IN REFUGEE SETTINGS**\n\n\nNational teachers can be excellent resources\nin refuge settings. Typically they are university\ngraduates or qualified teachers, and bring\ngood knowledge of the national curriculum\nand education system. They can serve\nas leaders in schools, build capacity of\nunqualified refugee teachers and provide a\nmuch needed boost to quality teaching and\nlearning. However, national teachers face\nmany challenges working in refugee settings\nand also require support. Recommended\nactions include:\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Provide systematic orientation, mentorship\nand support in isolated camp settings with\ntough working conditions\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Ensure accommodation for teachers\nserving in remote camp locations\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Provide training to respond to\npsychosocial issues and academically,\nlinguistically and culturally diverse\nclassrooms\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Promote links with refugee teachers\nor community members to facilitate\nunderstanding of refugee communities\u2019\neducational background, displacement\nexperience and assist with language,\nculture, religion\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Provide training for teachers working\nwith mixed groups of refugees and host\ncommunity children to promote tolerance\nand address discrimination\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **REFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT**\n\n##### **Checklist**\n\n1 **\u0007ASSESS NEEDS: TRACK AND ACCURATELY**\n**BUDGET FOR YOUR TEACHER SUPPLY.**\n\n#### \u00fc Teacher data disaggregated by level (ECD,\n\nPrimary etc); gender; qualification; status\n(refugee or national); per grade or upper/lower\nPrimary available\n\n#### \u00fc Data on teacher turnover rate available \u00fc Accurate projections of numbers of teachers\n\nrequired to meet acceptable teacher-pupil\nratios for this year and next year available and\nreflected in annual plans\n\n#### \u00fc Annual plans include budget for compensation\n\nAND training of unqualified teachers\n\n\n2 **\u0007RECRUIT: STANDARDIZE AND HARMONIZE**\n**TEACHER RECRUITMENT AND MANAGEMENT**\n**POLICIES.**\n\n#### \u00fc All partners use standardized, common teacher\n\npolicies and practices including:\n\n\n\u00e0 Teacher recruitment criteria and process\n\n\n\u00e0 Teacher terms of reference\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Teacher code of conduct with monitoring\nmechanisms and protocols to respond to\nviolations\n\n#### \u00fc Teacher compensation is harmonized amongst\n\nall partners\n#### \u00fc Teacher recruitment, terms of employment and\n\ncompensation policies are transparent and clear\nto all teachers\n\n\n\n3 **\u0007TRAIN: ENSURE THAT ALL TEACHERS HAVE**\n**ACCESS TO ORIENTATION, TRAINING AND**\n**ONGOING IN-SERVICE SUPPORT ACCORDING**\n**TO THEIR NEEDS.**\n\n#### \u00fc Data on teachers\u2019 educational background and\n\nteaching qualification and experience available\n\n#### \u00fc All newly recruited, unqualified refugee teachers\n\nare trained in basic teacher competencies within\nfirst three months of recruitment\n\n#### \u00fc All national and qualified teachers are oriented\n\nto and trained on specific issues in refugee\nsettings\n\n#### \u00fc All teachers have on-going in-service support\n\nand periodic training is coordinated and\nplanned as needed\n\n\n4 **\u0007MOTIVATE: FIND WAYS TO SUPPORT,**\n**MOTIVATE AND REWARD TEACHERS.**\n\n#### \u00fc Working conditions for teachers are improved \u00fc Opportunities for teachers to participate in\n\ndecision making and planning available\n\n\n\u00e8 Opportunities for teacher qualification and\ncertification with national training institutes or\nuniversities negotiated\n\n\n\nREFUGEE TEACHER MANAGEMENT **7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "disaggregated by",
-          "confidence": 0.8253830671310425,
-          "start": 49,
-          "end": 51
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "to",
-          "confidence": 0.5151188969612122,
-          "start": 97,
-          "end": 98
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "teacher turnover rate available \u00fc",
-          "confidence": 0.6612922549247742,
-          "start": 85,
-          "end": 90
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e769b1a-6ce8-3ed2-b390-34858d22c07a/560be1629.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_107/raw/doc_107_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,219 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**DOES UNHCR SUPPORT**\n**SECONDARY EDUCATION**\n**FOR REFUGEES?**\n\n\nYes, absolutely. Active promotion of and\nprogramming for secondary education is in line with\nobjective 3 of UNHCR\u2019s Education Strategy (20122016), to \u201cImprove access to formal secondary\neducation opportunities for refugee young people\u201d.\nThis objective also aligns with the global Sustainable\nDevelopment Goal target 4.1: \u201cBy 2030, ensure\nthat all girls and boys complete free, equitable and\nquality primary and _secondary education_ leading to\nrelevant and effective learning outcomes.\u201d\n\n\nSince the needs of forcibly displaced adolescents\nand youth vary, formal **secondary education**\n**should be considered as one element of a range**\n**of education options that should be available**\n**to meet the needs of refugee adolescents**\n**and youth** . Secondary education offers a critical\nopportunity for young people to complete formal\neducation; however, other programmes should\nalso be considered, depending on the profile of\nthe out-of-school adolescent population and in\nconsideration of their future prospects. A range\nof education programmes, designed in close\nconsultation with refugee adolescents and youth,\nmight include:\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007accelerated education (AE) for adolescents who\nhave dropped out or who have never been to\nschool\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007relevant technical and vocational training\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007basic literacy and life skills courses\n\n\n\n**WHY DOES SECONDARY**\n**EDUCATION MATTER FOR REFUGEE**\n**ADOLESCENTS AND YOUTH?**\n\n\nSecondary education for refugees provides a\ncritical bridge from primary education to higher\neducation and professional or vocational training,\ncontributing to the development of human\ncapital of refugee communities, self-reliance and\nsolutions. It\u2019s an essential step in ensuring that\nyoung refugees have the foundation for increased\nearning power and the skills to rebuild their\ncommunities. In addition:\n\n\n\u00e8 **Secondary education is fundamentally**\n**protective, especially for girls.** Without access\nto secondary education, refugee adolescents\nare vulnerable to child labour, exploitation\nand the negative coping behaviours (drugs,\npetty crime, etc.) associated with idle time and\nhopelessness. In some contexts out of school\nboys are especially vulnerable to recruitment\nto armed groups. The opportunity for girls to\ncontinue education can protect them from early\nmarriage and/or pregnancy and risks of sexual\nexploitation. Secondary education provides\na safe space for personal development and\npositive social networks for adolescents whose\ntransition to adulthood has been disrupted by\ninstability and violence.\n\n\n\u00e8 Secondary school is a **critical step in the**\n**education continuum to livelihoods and**\n**professional training and higher education**\noptions for young people, contributing to\ndurable solutions. Successful completion of\nsecondary education provides a competitive\nand eligible pool of candidates for tertiary\neducation and scholarships, and opens access\nto higher level skills training.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007The option to continue and complete secondary\neducation **improves children and families\u2019**\n**motivation and engagement in education**\nat lower levels, incentivizing retention and\nsuccessful completion of primary education.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007The longer-term **benefits of education for**\n**individuals and communities are fully realized**\n**with completion of secondary education,**\n**especially for girls and their families** . Women\nwith a secondary education are more likely to\nensure that their children go to school, and to\nraise healthier families. It\u2019s estimated that if all\nwomen had a secondary education, the instance\n\n\n\nSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS **2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "of child marriage and infant and maternal\nmortality would be significantly reduced, and\npreventable child disease and deaths would\nbe halved. Secondary education also leads\nto higher wage earnings, a narrowing of the\npay gap between men and women, and an\nopportunity for families to break from the cycle\nof poverty. [1]\n\n\n_Before, I felt hopeless. I was just a girl in_\n_a hopeless situation. But now, inside me_\n# **\u201c**\n_has changed. Because I have graduated_\n_from secondary school, my family and_\n_our neighbours have a new respect for_\n_me. They know I am educated and they_\n_cannot disgrace me. I am knowledgeable_\n_and have a job because of this education._\n_Education has become my pride. I have_\n_seen how other people live outside the_\n_camp. I have the confidence to speak_\n_out and be a leader. The benefits of this_\n_education are endless. I just wish all girls_\n_had my opportunity because having this, it_\n_changes your life forever.\u201d_\n\n\n_\u0007Angelique, 19, a Congolese refugee who received a_\n\n_scholarship to complete secondary education in Rwanda_\n\n\n**WHY AREN\u2019T MORE REFUGEE**\n**ADOLESCENTS GOING TO**\n**SECONDARY SCHOOL?**\n\n\nBoth supply and demand barriers prevent refugees\nfrom accessing secondary school.\n\n\n**Supply barriers**\n\n\n\u00e8 **Exclusion from national education systems:**\nIn some contexts refugees are excluded from\nnational secondary schools, either due to\nexplicit policy exclusion, or because access\n(registration places and capacity) for refugees\nhas not been negotiated with national\nauthorities. Many of the barriers listed below\nalso relate to exclusion from national schools.\n\n\n1 UNESCO (2013). _Education Transforms Lives_ . UNESCO,\n\nParis.\n\n\n\n\u00e8 **Cost:** Secondary education costs more, as a\nresult of the need for more teachers, classrooms\nand textbooks per child, than primary\neducation. Secondary education also requires\nspecialised infrastructure and equipment\nfor science and computer laboratories and\nlibraries. In many countries the cost of school\nfees and charges, textbooks, uniforms and\nschool supplies effectively lock children out of\nsecondary education. In some locations where\ndistance is prohibitive, costs for transport or\nboarding rapidly escalate the cost of attending\nsecondary school.\n\n\u00e8 **Distance:** Especially in rural and remote\nlocations, secondary schools are few and far\nbetween, limiting access for both host country\nand refugee children. Transport options are not\nalways available or affordable. Distance also\nraises protection risks, especially for young girls.\n\n\u00e8 **Language:** For young refugees hoping to\ntransition to secondary school in a new country\nof asylum, a new language of instruction can\npresent a significant barrier, especially due\nto the increased complexity of concepts and\nvocabulary expected at this level.\n\n\u00e8 **Documentation:** Recognized certification\nshowing successful completion of primary\neducation, as well as other types of\ndocumentation like birth certificates, is\nusually required to enter secondary school.\nIn many cases refugees do not have identity\nor education documents, and this problem is\noften exacerbated by a lack of cross-border\nrecognition of certificates and equivalencies.\n\n\u00e8 **Capacity (especially in camp settings):**\nSecondary services demand greater resources\nand higher levels of technical capacity than\nprimary education services, including more\nspecialised and qualified teachers, and skilled\nadministrators and programme officers with\ncapacity for the complex planning and timetabling of the multiple, simultaneous lessons\nrequired at secondary levels.\n\n\n**Demand barriers**\n\n\n\u00e8 **Low primary completion rates:** In some\nrefugee contexts the low rate of participation\nand quality at upper primary levels lead to\nlow numbers of children successfully passing\nprimary examinations, making them ineligible to\ncontinue on to secondary education.\n\n\n\nSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00e8 **Opportunity costs:** Under the stress and\npressures of displacement, many adolescents\nand/or their families prioritize the short term\nbenefits of early marriage, domestic labour at\nhome or elsewhere, or wage-earning activities.\nThis is especially true when high secondary\neducation costs take away from household\nresources.\n\n\n\u00e8 **Cultural norms:** Cultural practices and beliefs,\nespecially around girls\u2019 access to schooling\nand early marriage, keep young girls out of\nsecondary school, particularly where primary\neducation is considered to be an adequate level\nof schooling for a girl. Boys may also be under\npressure to drop out of school to work and\nprovide for their families.\n\n\n\n\u00e8 **Value of secondary education:** In some\ncases young people and their families simply\ndon\u2019t see the benefits of pursuing secondary\neducation, especially if they have experienced\npoor quality primary education, or perceive\nthe efforts required to access secondary\n(distance, cost, language, etc.) to be too\ndifficult. Peer pressure, family responsibilities,\nrecruitment into armed groups, and a lack of\nunderstanding of the long-term benefits of\nsecondary education can discourage transition\nto secondary school.\n\n\n\nSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS **4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **PLANNING FOR SECONDARY EDUCATION IN SIX STEPS:**\n\n\n\n1 **\u0007DETERMINE HOW MANY REFUGEES (AND**\n**HOST COMMUNITY) CHILDREN WILL NEED**\n**SECONDARY SERVICES IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS**\n\n\n**Assess current and project future demand for**\n**secondary education: How many refugee (and**\n**host community children if mainstreaming) are**\n**expected to require secondary services in the**\n**next 3-5 years?**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Calculate the number of children who are expected to successfully complete primary school\nin the current academic year OR in emergency\ncontexts, the number of eligible candidates\nready to start or continue secondary education.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Project demand: Study enrolment rates in\nupper primary and estimate numbers of refugee\nstudents requiring secondary services annually\nover the next 3-5 years. Be sure to check if the\ndemand is expected to increase due to targets\nfor enrolling out-of-school children, large class\nsizes at lower primary levels or new schools that\nwill produce their first graduating classes in the\nnext years.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Assess and project host community demand for\nsecondary education in the coming 3-5 years in\ncases where mainstreaming in national schools\nis an option, or where host community children\nmight access camp-based schools.\n\n\n2 **\u0007ENSURE THAT ADEQUATE SECONDARY**\n**EDUCATION SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE TO**\n**MEET NEEDS**\n\n\n**Assess secondary education supply and quality:**\n**Is mainstreaming refugees in the national**\n**system possible? Do national secondary schools**\n**in the area have capacity to absorb refugee**\n**students? If national schools are not available,**\n**are experienced, qualified partners available to**\n**manage secondary services in camp settings?**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Work closely with the Ministry of Education at\nnational and local levels, as well as other key\npartners like UNICEF and UNESCO to advocate\nand negotiate for inclusion of refugees in\nnational secondary schools.\n\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Determine measures and funding required\nto enhance capacity of national schools to\nmainstream refugee students, including building\nnew classroom spaces and recruitment of\nadditional teachers, training and orientation\nfor the school community (teachers, students,\nparents) and language classes and orientation\nfor refugee students.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Camp based schools are not recommended,\nbut are sometimes the only option available.\nEnsure that implementing partners have\nsufficient expertise to manage secondary\nschools. Ensure funds are allocated to meet\nthe cost of adequate numbers of qualified,\nspecialised teachers (minimize use of untrained\nteachers), and additional resources necessary\nfor secondary education including classroom\nspaces to accommodate a complex timetable,\nscience labs, libraries and computer labs.\nAdvocate with the Ministry of Education to\ndeploy national qualified teachers to camp\nschools.\n\n\nPlease refer to Education Brief 4 on Mainstreaming\nrefugee children in the national education system\nfor more details.\n\n\n3 **\u0007ENCOURAGE A HIGH RATE OF PARTICIPATION**\n**IN SECONDARY EDUCATION**\n\n\n**Provide targeted support for 100% transition**\n**rate from upper primary to secondary: What are**\n**the barriers that prevent every upper primary**\n**school child from transitioning to secondary?**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Analyze the percentage of children successfully\npassing primary examinations and transitioning\nto secondary education. Using available data\nand focus group discussions, assess the main\nbarriers for boys and girls that prevent transition\nfrom primary to secondary school.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Consider the following examples of programme\nresponse:\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Increased support to education quality at\nupper primary levels and preparation for\nexaminations through qualified, trained\nteachers, analysis of examination results,\nremedial classes, etc.\n\n\n\nSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Project demand",
-          "confidence": 0.8448634147644043,
-          "start": 142,
-          "end": 144
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee\nstudents",
-          "confidence": 0.9080043435096741,
-          "start": 155,
-          "end": 157
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": null
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "available data",
-          "confidence": 0.9531819224357605,
-          "start": 633,
-          "end": 635
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "in the",
-          "confidence": 0.572762668132782,
-          "start": 541,
-          "end": 543
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "discussions, assess",
-          "confidence": 0.6006221175193787,
-          "start": 638,
-          "end": 641
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS",
-          "confidence": 0.6799928545951843,
-          "start": 701,
-          "end": 703
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": null
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00e0 \u0007Mentorship and accompaniment\nprogrammes to provide academic support\nand counselling for students, especially\ngirls, to successfully finish primary and\ntransition to secondary.\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Advocacy campaigns with the community\non the importance of primary exams and\nthe many benefits of secondary education.\nThis can include the engagement of role\nmodels within the community to champion\nsecondary education, including higher\neducation students (DAFI or other) and\ngraduates.\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Material support to enable secondary\nschool attendance including cost of school\nfees, transport, uniforms and textbooks,\nsanitary materials for girls, etc. Consider\ncost sharing with refugee families where\npossible and also consider the use of\ncash-based assistance to support access to\nsecondary, especially in urban areas.\n\n\n\u00e0 \u0007Language classes, negotiations around\ndocumentation requirements, etc. to\nfacilitate access to secondary schools.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Work closely with protection and livelihoods\ncolleagues to design cross-sectoral\ninterventions that address household pressures\nthat pull adolescents out of school and re-direct\nthem to work, marriage, household help, etc.\n\n\n4 **\u0007IDENTIFY BARRIERS STOPPING ADOLESCENTS**\n**FROM SUCCESSFULLY FINISHING SECONDARY,**\n**AND ENSURE THAT POST-SECONDARY**\n**EDUCATION OPTIONS EXIST**\n\n\n**Monitor and support retention and completion**\n**of secondary, and support transitioning students**\n**to post-secondary education options.**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Assess factors contributing to drop-out at\nthe secondary level and design programme\ninterventions to address these issues. Examples\ninclude: mentorship for girls; bicycles to\nfacilitate transport to school where distance\nleads to drop out; academic support to ensure\nsuccessful transition to upper secondary;\ncontinued community advocacy on the benefits\nof completion of secondary; cash grants where\nfamilies are likely to pull students from school to\nsave household resources.\n\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Working with livelihoods colleagues, ensure\npathways to post-secondary vocational\nand skills training are available, as well\nas opportunities to continue on to higher\neducation. Post-secondary education\nopportunities increase student motivation and\nconsequently retention and completion of\nsecondary school.\n\n\n5 **\u0007ASSES HOW MUCH MONEY IS NEEDED TO**\n**ASSURE SECONDARY SERVICES FOR REFUGEES**\n**AND IDENTIFY SOURCES OF FUNDING**\n\n\n**Advocate for and raise funds for secondary**\n**education for refugees.**\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007In line with the Sustainable Development Goal 4\ntarget 4.1 on increasing access to both primary\nand secondary education for all children,\nadvocate with national partners for access to\nsecondary services for refugee children. Cost\nsharing or material contributions to the national\neducation system may be necessary.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007In many refugee operations, secondary\neducation has been deprioritized due to a\nlack of funds. Active leveraging of funds for\nsecondary education is recommended, based\non clear, evidence-based proposals that project\nnumbers of beneficiaries and accurate costs\nover the next 3-5 years.\n\n\n\u00e8 \u0007Where possible, work with UNICEF to identify\ndevelopment agencies active in the country\nwho may be approached to support secondary\neducation. JAICA and the World Bank are\ntwo examples, in addition to working with\nthe Global Partnership for Education (GPE) to\nensure that national education sector plans\nmake provision for refugee education. This\noption is especially promising where refugees\nare being mainstreamed into national schools,\nand the programme can be cast in terms of\nenhancement of national capacity for secondary\neducation.\n\n\n\nSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE ADOLESCENTS **6**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "6 **\u0007MEASURE PROGRESS IN SECONDARY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEES**\n\n\nThe following indicators from UNHCR\u2019s Results Framework are relevant to secondary education. Minimum\nindicators that should be selected by operations are highlighted in **bold.**\n\n\nRights Group Basic Needs and Essential Services\n\n|Impact<br>Indicators|% of secondary school-aged young people enrolled in secondary education|\n|---|---|\n|Impact<br>Indicators|<br>**Extent persons of concern have access to national education systems**|\n\n\n|Performance<br>Indicators|# of students enrolled in lower secondary education|\n|---|---|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|# of students enrolled in lower secondary education in the correct grade for their age|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|# of students enrolled in upper secondary education|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|# of students enrolled in upper secondary education in the correct grade for their age|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|% of female secondary education teachers|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|% of lower secondary school graduates (successful completion of fnal grade)|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|**% of upper secondary school graduates (successful completion of fnal grade)**|\n\n\n|OUTPUT: USE OF|F TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION SERVICE PROVISION EXPANDED|\n|---|---|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|% of secondary schools providing students daily access to computers|\n|<br>Performance<br>Indicators|% of secondary schools providing students daily access to e-books, tablets or other similar<br>devices|\n\n\n|Performance<br>Indicators|% of PoC for which country of origin learning achievement is recognized (secondary<br>school)|\n|---|---|\n|Output|Measures to improve primary education quality and learning achievement implemented|\n|Performance<br>Indicators|**% of primary school graduates (successful completion of fnal grade)**|\n\n\n\nAdditional disaggregated data to consider, important for programme planning include:\n\n\n% of girls and boys transitioning from primary to secondary school\n\n\n% of girls and boys enrolled in secondary school (Gross and Net enrolment rates)\n\n\n% of girls and boys transitioning from lower to upper secondary school\n\n**Sample quality and protection indicators**\n\n% of teachers with recognized teacher qualifcations\n\n\nAverage Pupil-teacher ratio\n\n\nAverage Pupil-classroom, gender-segregated latrine, textbook, computer ratios\n\n\n% of schools with adequate science lab, computer lab, library facilities and equipment\n\n\n% of schools with active community involvement (parent-teacher association etc.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Results Framework",
-          "confidence": 0.507690966129303,
-          "start": 20,
-          "end": 22
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.936853289604187,
-          "start": 17,
-          "end": 18
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "secondary school-aged young people",
-          "confidence": 0.8915436267852783,
-          "start": 61,
-          "end": 65
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Gross and Net enrolment rates",
-          "confidence": 0.5122154951095581,
-          "start": 450,
-          "end": 455
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Sample quality and protection indicators",
-          "confidence": 0.7394987940788269,
-          "start": 470,
-          "end": 475
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/54ec767e-f026-3679-bafd-a61a90671fd8/560be1759.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_108/raw/doc_108_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,138 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00a9 UNHCR/Sebastian Rich\n\n# SYRIAN REFUGEES IN LEBANON\n\n## **REFERRAL CARE AT A GLANCE** **JANUARY- DECEMBER 2016** **UNHCR**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### OVERVIEW\n\nSecondary and tertiary health care institutions in Lebanon are mostly\nprivate and cost is a significant barrier to access. UNHCR has put in place\nreferral guidelines and standard operating procedures (SOP) to support\naccess to life saving and obstetric care and manage costs. The costs\ncovered by UNHCR vary according to the type of service provided and the\nvulnerability status of the refugee.\n\n\nUNHCR contracts a third party administrator (TPA) to manage and audit\nreferral care.\n\n\nIn September 2016, **1,017,433** Syrian refugees and **22,007** refugees from\nother countries were registered with UNHCR. However, the referral care\nprogramme also supports access to life saving and obstetric care for\nunregistered refugees.\n\n\n  - The total number of referrals increased from **61,820** in 2015 to\n**76,535** in 2016. This is an increase of **24%** .\n\n  - The number of referral requests covered financially by UNHCR has\nincreased slightly from **95%** in 2015 to **97%** in 2016.\n\n  - In January 2016 the UNHCR network consisted of **56** hospitals. By\nthe end of 2016 the number had been rationalized to **50** . The\nmajority ( **71%** ) of accepted referrals were treated in **20** of these\nhospitals.\n\n  - The majority ( **53.0%** ) of referrals were for maternity care, **32%** of\ndeliveries were by C-section compared to **34%** in 2015.\n\n  - Of the approved referrals there were **869** deaths of which **52%**\nwere in children under one year of age, predominantly in the\nperinatal period.\n\n  - TPA financial audit of hospital invoices led to a **7.3%** deduction of\nthe overall total cost invoiced by hospitals.\n\n  - **33.8%** of total expenditure was spent on maternity care compared\nto **40.1%** in 2015.\n\n  - The average cost per referral was **586 USD** compared to **544 USD** in\n2015.\n\n### DATA\n\n\nUNHCR, through its TPA, collected data on requests for coverage for\nhospital referral. The data for accepted referrals included the diagnosis,\ncare received, outcome and cost of the service.\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "requests for coverage for\nhospital referral",
-          "confidence": 0.7655683755874634,
-          "start": 442,
-          "end": 448
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.762339174747467,
-          "start": 433,
-          "end": 434
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.5907511115074158,
-          "start": 309,
-          "end": 310
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "accepted referrals",
-          "confidence": 0.9395807385444641,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 454
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "accepted referrals",
-          "confidence": 0.6842486262321472,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 454
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### SECTION 1: NUMBER OF REFERRALS (JAN-DEC 2016)\n\nFIGURE 1: NUMBER OF REFERRALS PER MONTH BY COVERAGE STATUS\n\n\n## **Key findings**\n\n#### Increasing number of referrals overall in 2015 and 2016. A seasonal pattern of more referrals during the winter months mainly due to higher respiratory morbidity.\n\n## 74%\n#### Proportion of referrals of female patients, reflecting the high proportion of obstetric care ( 75% in 2015).\n\n## 24 %\n#### Proportion of referrals of children <5 years of age ( 23% in 2015).\n\n## 24.2 years\n#### Mean age in years at admission for females ( 24.3 years in 2015).\n\n## 16.2 years\n#### Mean age in years at admission for males ( 15.8 years in 2015).\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 2: NUMBER OF REFUGEES SUPPORTED AND FREQUENCY OF ADMISSIONS PER REFUGEE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 3: REFERRALS BY SEX AND AGE GROUP\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FIGURE 4: PROPORTION OF REFERRALS AT THE 20 MOST FREQUENTED CONTRACTED HOSPITALS\n\n\n## **Key findings** 71%\n#### Proportion of referrals covered in 20 hospitals (70% in 2015), 29% of referrals covered at the remaining 30 contracted hospitals.\n\n## 441\n#### Number of referrals per month to Dr Hamed Farhat Hospital in the Bekaa.\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 5: REFERRALS BY REGION\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### SECTION 2: REASON FOR REFERRALS\n\nFIGURE 6: ICD-10 DIAGNOSTIC CATEGORY ON DISCHARGE, AS PROPORTION OF APPROVED REFERRALS (N=73,951)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 7:  PROPORTION OF SPECIFIC DIAGNOSES WITHIN CATEGORIES\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### SECTION 3: MORTALITY\n\nFIGURE 8: NUMBER OF DEATHS PER ICD-10 DIAGNOSTIC CATEGORY (N = 869)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n## **Key findings** 1.2%\n\nMortality (unchanged\nfrom 2015).\n\n## 869 of 73,951\n\nreferrals died before\ndischarge. Another\n**186** deaths were\nrecorded related to\ndeliveries, mainly\nattributed to\nstillbirths.\n\n## 52% of the 869\n\n\ndeaths were children\nunder one, mainly in\nthe perinatal period\nof which **26%** were\nattributed to\nprematurity.\n\n## 19%\n\n\nof deaths were due\nto cardiovascular\ndisease.\n\n## 5*\n\n\nmaternal deaths in\nUNHCR supported\ndeliveries.\n\n\n*The Vital Data Observatory\nof the Ministry of Public\nHealth has recorded 13\nmaternal deaths of about\n42,000 deliveries in Syrians\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 9: NUMBER OF DEATHS BY AGE AND SEX\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 10: MORTALITY PER REGION\n\n\n\n2.0%\n1.8%\n1.6%\n1.4%\n1.2%\n1.0%\n0.8%\n0.6%\n0.4%\n0.2%\n0.0%\n\n\n\n1.2%\n\n\nBeirut & Mt\n\nLebanon\n\n\n\n1.9%\n\n\n1.0%\n\n0.8%\n\n\nBekaa North South\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### SECTION 4: FINANCE\n\nFIGURE 11: TOTAL COST PER ICD-10 DIAGNOSIS CATEGORY (MILLION USD)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 12: AVERAGE COST PER CASE PER ICD-10 DIAGNOSIS CATEGORIES (USD)\n\n\n|ICD-10 Diagnosis category|Average cost per case<br>(USD)|\n|---|---|\n|Congenital malformations|2969|\n|Conditions originating in the perinatal period|1989|\n|Mental and behavioural disorders|1399|\n|Diseases of the circulatory system|1141|\n|Neoplasms|1121|\n|Diseases of the nervous system|994|\n|Factors influencing health status|835|\n|Diseases of the eye and adnexa|797|\n|Injuries|743|\n|Diseases of the digestive system|709|\n|Diseases of the musculoskeletal system|661|\n|Endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases|637|\n|Diseases of the genitourinary system|569|\n|Diseases of the respiratory system|522|\n|Diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue|504|\n|Diseases of the blood & immune disorders|478|\n|Pregnancy, childbirth & the puerperium<br>|373|\n|Diseases of the ear and the mastoid process|366|\n|Certain infectious and parasitic diseases|363|\n|Symptoms, signs and abnormal findings|326|\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FIGURE 13: PROPORTION OF COST BY HOSPITAL (TOP 20 HOSPITALS)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFIGURE 14: AVERAGE COST PER CASE IN 20 HOSPITALS WITH THE HIGHEST TOTAL COST\n\n\n|Hospital|Average Cost / Case<br>(USD)|\n|---|---|\n|La Paix|2587|\n|Rayak|1261|\n|Notre-Dame du Liban|941|\n|Rafik Hariri|809|\n|Bekaa|786|\n|Raee|725|\n|Kassab|688|\n|Tripoli|679|\n|Elias Heraoui|595|\n|Sahel|585|\n|Iklim|581|\n|Rayan Hospital|570|\n|Notre Dame de la Paix|548|\n|Dr Hamed Farhat|523|\n|Nabih Berri / Nabatieh|507|\n|Manara|461|\n|Islamic - Tripoli|429|\n|Khair|323|\n|Al Mortada|315|\n|Osman|270|\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0e5f09b3-3bf2-3254-9724-620ef066e163/57319.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_109/raw/doc_109_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,286 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n## DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\n\nJanuary-April 2017\n\n\n\nRefugees and migrants entering and crossing Europe via the Mediterranean and Western Balkans routes\n\n\nOn 24 November 2016, the Phoenix rescue vessel, belonging to Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS) intercepted an inflatable vessel carrying 146 refugees and migrants who had travelled from West African countries to Libya, and attempted to cross\nthe sea to Europe. Their boat was seriously overloaded and in danger of sinking, four hours into their dangerous sea voyage from the port of Sabratha, on Libya's northern coastline.\n\n\n\nIn spite of several measures to prevent irregular entries to Europe\nand irregular movement between European states, [1] refugees and\nmigrants continue to enter the region as well as travel on irregularly from one European country to others, albeit at a significantly\nreduced scale. In addition, there is very limited access to safe and\nlegal pathways to enter Europe, including for those seeking international protection, and because of challenging conditions in\nsome EU countries where refugees first arrive and slow relocation\nefforts, and many see little alternative but to cross borders irregularly, despite the multiple risks this entails.\n\n\nCompared to the first four months of 2016, it has become even\nmore difficult to cross European borders with several European\nstates having introduced additional measures and practices to\nprevent irregular entries, including of people seeking international protection. While this has resulted in a significant reduction in\nnumbers crossing into Europe from Turkey to Greece by sea, it\nhas also meant that people are now using more diverse (and often\nmore dangerous) routes to enter or cross through Europe.\n\n\nAs a result of dangerous routes to and through Europe, high numbers of refugees and migrants continued to die at Europe\u2019s borders as well as on the way to Europe. [2] In the first four months\nof 2017, the number of estimated deaths in the Central Mediterranean increased 5 per cent compared to the same period last\nyear with 1,019 refugees and migrants reported dead or missing at\nsea. [3] A further 76 persons have also died at sea in the Eastern or\nWestern Mediterranean in the same period. [4] In addition, as states\nin the region have continued border restrictions, [5] at least 26 ref\n\n1 European Commission, _EU-Turkey Statement: Questions and Answers,_ 19 March 2016,\nhttp://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-16-963_en.htm, Euronews, _Italy-Libya sign agree-_\n_ment to curb flow of migrants to Europe,_ [2 February 2017, http://www.euronews.com/2017/02/02/](http://www.euronews.com/2017/02/02/italy-libya-sign-agreement-to-curb-flow-of-migrants-to-europe)\n[italy-libya-sign-agreement-to-curb-fow-of-migrants-to-europe, The Telegraph,](http://www.euronews.com/2017/02/02/italy-libya-sign-agreement-to-curb-flow-of-migrants-to-europe) _Saharan tribal_\n_chiefs pledge to stop flow of migrants heading for Europe via Libya,_ [4 April 2017, http://www.tele-](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/04/tribal-chiefs-sahara-pledge-stop-flow-migrants-heading-eu)\n[graph.co.uk/news/2017/04/04/tribal-chiefs-sahara-pledge-stop-fow-migrants-heading-europe/,](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/04/tribal-chiefs-sahara-pledge-stop-flow-migrants-heading-eu)\nEU Observer, _EU funds for Sudan may worsen fate of refugees,_ [10 April 2017, https://euobserver.](https://euobserver.com/migration/137489)\n[com/migration/137489, The Guardian,](https://euobserver.com/migration/137489) _Balkan countries shut borders as attention turns to new_\n_refugee routes,_ 9 March 2016, [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/09/balkans-refu-](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/09/balkans-refugee-route-closed-say-european-leaders)\n[gee-route-closed-say-european-leaders.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/09/balkans-refugee-route-closed-say-european-leaders)\n2  Some have suggested that the number of persons who die crossing the Sahara Desert en\nroute to Libya may be far higher. See Regional Mixed Migration Secretariat, _Forgotten fatalities:_\n_the number of migrant deaths before reaching the Mediterranean,_ 27 June 2016, [http://re-](http://regionalmms.org/index.php/component/spsimpleportfolio/item/18)\n[gionalmms.org/index.php/component/spsimpleportfolio/item/18.](http://regionalmms.org/index.php/component/spsimpleportfolio/item/18)\n3 The degree of increase was higher for the first three months of 2017 (135 per cent) compared to the same period in 2016 but was offset by the deaths of 500 people in a single incident\nin April 2016 en route from Egypt to Italy.\n4 UNHCR, _Mediterranean: Dead and Missing at Sea_ [, April 2017, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56289)\n[documents/download/56289](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56289)\n5 UNHCR, _Border fences and internal border controls in_ Europe, March 2017, [https://data2.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55249)\n[unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55249](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55249)\n\n\n\nugees and migrants are known to have died since the start of\nthe year while traveling to or crossing land borders in Europe. Of\nthese, nine have died while trying to cross from Turkey to Greece\nor Bulgaria, seven while crossing through the Balkans and six\nwhile trying to cross from Italy to a neighbouring country. [6] In addition, abuses by smugglers, criminal groups, as well as some state\nauthorities continue to be reported at multiple points along the\nprimary routes into and through Europe while women and children continue to face particular risks, including of sexual violence.\n\n\nIn the first four months of the year, the Central Mediterranean\nroute has remained the primary entry point for most to Europe\naccounting for approximately 74 per cent of entries via one of the\nthree Mediterranean routes. With sea arrivals to Greece having\nfallen drastically compared to the same period in 2016, increased\nsea arrivals to Spain have meant that arrivals via the Western\nMediterranean now constitute a greater proportion of arrivals to\nEurope via the three Mediterranean routes.\n\n\nMany of those using these dangerous routes to enter Europe are\nin need of international protection. Since the start of the year,\nmost of those using the Eastern Mediterranean route from Turkey to Greece, Bulgaria, and Cyprus are likely to be in need of\ninternational protection and come from countries including Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. In Italy, the arrival point for those using\nthe Central Mediterranean route from North Africa, 42 per cent\nof asylum applications processed so far in 2017 have resulted in\napplicants being granted some form of protection. Of these, 9 per\ncent were granted refugee status, another 9 per cent subsidiary\nprotection and 24 per cent were granted humanitarian protection.\n\n\nWith very limited opportunities for resettlement and other complementary pathways, while those seeking to join family members\nwho have already been granted protection in the EU face numerous obstacles to do so, [7] many will continue to see little alternative\nbut to try to enter Europe irregularly.\n\n\n6 In addition, another seven refugees and migrants have died on land since the start of the\nyear at reception centres or other sites around Europe but not specifically while travelling to or\ncrossing borders.\n7 UNHCR, _Projected Global Resettlement Needs 2017,_ June 2016, [http://www.unhcr.org/](http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/575836267/unhcr-projected-global-resettlement-needs-2017.html)\n[protection/resettlement/575836267/unhcr-projected-global-resettlement-needs-2017.html; Euro-](http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/575836267/unhcr-projected-global-resettlement-needs-2017.html)\npean Migration Network, _Family Reunification of Third-Country Nationals in the EU plus Norway:_\n_National Practices,_ [April 2017, https://emnbelgium.be/sites/default/fles/publications/FINAL_00_](https://emnbelgium.be/sites/default/files/publications/FINAL_00_family_reunification_synthesis_report_final_en_print_ready.pdf)\n[family_reunifcation_synthesis_report_fnal_en_print_ready.pdf; IRIN,](https://emnbelgium.be/sites/default/files/publications/FINAL_00_family_reunification_synthesis_report_final_en_print_ready.pdf) _Hardening European_\n_Policies Keep Refugee Children apart from their Families_ [, 20 April 2017, https://www.irinnews.org/](https://www.irinnews.org/feature/2017/04/20/hardening-european-policies-keep-refugee-children-apart-their-families)\n[feature/2017/04/20/hardening-european-policies-keep-refugee-children-apart-their-families](https://www.irinnews.org/feature/2017/04/20/hardening-european-policies-keep-refugee-children-apart-their-families)\n\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n### EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\nBetween January and April 2017, 5,164 refugees and\nmigrants crossed the sea from Turkey to Greece with\nthe average number of daily arrivals dropping to 39\nin April from 45 in January. The numbers crossing in\nthe first four months of 2017 are just a fraction of the\nover 155,000 refugees and migrants who crossed in\nthe first four months of 2016 due to a combination of\nfactors, including the closure of the so-called Western Balkan route, the introduction of additional visa\nrestrictions, and the EU-Turkey Statement. In 2017\nso far, Chios, Lesvos, Samos and Kastellorizo have\nbeen the primary arrival sites.\n\n\nSyrians continue to be the largest group crossing\nthe sea to Greece from Turkey and comprised 38\nper cent of arrivals with Iraqis comprising 11 per cent.\nSyrians and Iraqis arriving in Greece consist mostly\nof family groups. In 2017 so far, there has been a\ngreater diversity of nationalities crossing the sea to\nGreece and unlike in 2016, nationals of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Algeria (both 6 per\ncent) are among the main arrival groups with Palestinians (5 per cent) rounding out the top 5. Approximately half of arrivals by sea to Greece were male\n\n\n\n\n\nAt the Greece-Turkey land border, 660 refugees\nand migrants have crossed from Turkey since the\nstart of the year, a 54 per cent decrease from during\nthe same period in 2016. Arrivals in April included\na group of 64 that was left on a little island on the\nGreek side of the river to be later rescued by Greek\nauthorities. While the numbers crossing to Greece\nvia the land border have dropped compared to\nthe same period in 2016, since the start of the year\nTurkish authorities have reported intercepting over\n6,500 refugees and migrants attempting to cross\nthe land border to Greece.\n\n\nIn the first four months of 2017, 1,097 unregistered\nrefugees and migrants have been apprehended in\nBulgaria with most being apprehended in the interior of the country rather than in border regions\nshortly after entry. So far, these numbers are 75\nper cent lower than in the corresponding period in\n2016. Most of those apprehended have been from\nAfghanistan (49 per cent), Syria (13 per cent) and\nIraq (13 per cent). Of the 351 persons apprehended\nnear the Turkish border in this period, 83 per cent\nhave crossed the border in locations other than the\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nCOUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF PRIMARY GROUPS ARRIVING BY SEA TO GREECE - JAN TO APR 2017\n\n\n0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%\n\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\n\nIraq\n\n\nAlgeria\n\n\nDemocratic Republic of Congo\n\n\nPalestine\n\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nStateless\n\n\nPakistan\n\n\nKuwait\n\n\nIran\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n38%\n\n\ntio was one death for every 402 persons who were\nable to cross.\n\n\nOf the nine refugees and migrants who have died\nsince the start of the year trying to depart Turkey\nvia its land borders, three died of exposure trying to\ncross to Bulgaria in freezing conditions. The other\nsix died trying to cross to Greece with three drowning while crossing the Evros River, two are thought\nto have died of exposure in mid-winter, and one\ndied in a car crash when a van driven by smugglers\ncrashed while being pursued by police in northern\nGreece. [13] This amounts to one death for every 110\npersons that crossed by land to Greece, a higher\nrate of deaths than those crossing from Turkey to\nGreece by sea.\n\n\nPush-backs continue to be reported from Greece\nat the land border with Turkey with refugees and\nmigrants, including women and children, report\u00ading\nbeing apprehended in Greece, detained in po\u00adlice\nstations for several hours then later returned informally across the Evros River without being al\u00adlowed\nan opportunity to seek asylum. UNHCR has raised\nconcerns regarding reports about the alleged pushbacks and _refoulement_ at the land border between\nGreece and Turkey.\n\n\nUNHCR also continues to receive accounts of pushbacks by Bulgarian authorities to Turkey while vigilante groups have also continued to patrol parts of\nthe Bulgarian border at times, with concerning implications for any refugees and migrants they may\napprehend. [14]\n\n\n_**Onward Movement from Greece and Bulgaria**_\n\n\nRefugees and migrants continue to try to move onwards from Greece and Bulgaria, including because\nof eligibility practices (in particular the extremely\nhigh rejection rate for Afghan asylum-seekers), and\nsubstandard living conditions in the reception centres in Bulgaria, [15] limited integration prospects in\n\n\n13 Associated Press, _The Latest: Migrant dies in Greece after smug-_\n_glers chased,_ [24 April 2017, https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-migrant-](https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-migrant-boat-sinks-aegean-sea-16-dead-122707702.html)\n[boat-sinks-aegean-sea-16-dead-122707702.html](https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-migrant-boat-sinks-aegean-sea-16-dead-122707702.html)\n14 NBC News, _Bulgarian Vigilantes Patrol Turkey Border to Keep_\n_Migrants Out_ [, 10 March 2017, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/eu-](http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/europes-border-crisis/bulgarian-vigilantes-patrol-turkey-border-keep-migrants-out-n723481)\n[ropes-border-crisis/bulgarian-vigilantes-patrol-turkey-border-keep-mi-](http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/europes-border-crisis/bulgarian-vigilantes-patrol-turkey-border-keep-migrants-out-n723481)\n[grants-out-n723481](http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/europes-border-crisis/bulgarian-vigilantes-patrol-turkey-border-keep-migrants-out-n723481)\n15 UNHCR Bureau for Europe, _Weekly Report,_ [3 April 2017, https://](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55248)\n[data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55248](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/55248)\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nSince mid-2016, increased numbers of people have\nstarted to cross the sea from Turkey to Cyprus.\nBetween January and April this year, 302 refugees, mostly from Syria, arrived by sea to Cyprus,\nincluding many children, compared to just 28 in a\nsingle boat in the same period in 2016. Many have\nreported coming from Idlib via Turkey and several\nof the arrivals have joined family members already\non the island. In March, 13 unaccompanied children\nfrom Somalia were amongst the 157 arrivals. Others\nthought to have been headed to Cyprus have also\nbeen intercepted or rescued at sea by Turkish authorities, including a group of 30 Syrians rescued\nat the end of March after drifting for four days when\ntheir captain abandoned them after their boat ran\nout of fuel.\n\n\nRefugees and migrants also continue to try to cross\ndirectly from Turkey to Italy with 539 persons recorded as having reached Italy from Turkey in 2017\nas of the end of April. Most arrivals via this route\nhave been from Iraq with smaller numbers of Pakistanis, Somalis, and Iranians. In addition, several\nmore boats headed to Italy have been rescued off\nGreek islands or been intercepted by the Turkish\nCoast Guard, including a boat with 172 persons on\nboard in March [10] and another with 199 on board in\nApril. [11]\n\n\nWhile significantly reduced from the 386 deaths\nbetween January and April 2016, 28 persons are\nknown to have died or gone missing at sea in the\nEastern Mediterranean in the first four months of\n2017. This includes 11 Syrians who drowned while\nattempting to reach the Greek island of Samos on\n24 March. Amongst this group were a Syrian woman and her two children attempting to join her husband in Germany. [12] On 24 April, another 16 people\ndrowned off the coast of Lesvos. So far in 2017, this\namounts to one death for every 185 persons who\nmanaged to cross by sea to Greece, a higher ratio\nthan between January and April 2016 when the ra\n\n10 Sahil G\u00fcvenlik Komutanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, _G\u00fcncel Faaliyetleri_, 24 March 2017,\n[http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/mart/24MART2017_MANAV-](http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/mart/24MART2017_MANAVGAT.pdf)\n[GAT.pdf](http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/mart/24MART2017_MANAVGAT.pdf)\n11 Sahil G\u00fcvenlik Komutanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, _G\u00fcncel Faaliyetleri_, 14 April 2017,\n[http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/nisan/14NISAN2017_SI-](http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/nisan/14NISAN2017_SIGACIKYELKENLI.doc)\n[GACIKYELKENLI.doc](http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/nisan/14NISAN2017_SIGACIKYELKENLI.doc)\n12 Daily Mail, _Syrian refugee discovers his wife, 24, and two young_\n_children have drowned in the Mediterranean while trying to reunite with him_\n_in Germany_ [, 7 April 2017, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4390400/](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4390400/Syrian-refugee-discovers-wife-two-children-drowned.html)\n[Syrian-refugee-discovers-wife-two-children-drowned.html](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4390400/Syrian-refugee-discovers-wife-two-children-drowned.html)\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nGreece, [16] and limited access to or lengthy processes\nto reunite with family members in other EU States. [17]\nMoreover, no effective integration programme is yet\nin place in Bulgaria, which limits refugees\u2019 access\nto schools, health care, and employment opportunities.\n\n\nThe rate of relocations under the EU\u2019s Emergency\nRelocation Mechanism since its inception in September 2015 remains limited, [18] with just 12,646 asylum-seekers relocated from Greece as of 4 May \u2013\nrepresenting just 19 per cent of the initial target of\n66,400 persons. In April, the European Commission\ncalled on EU Member States to \u201cavoid overly restrictive preferences and delays and limit requirements\ncausing delays in the transfer procedure\u201d and to remove \u201coperational and logistical bottlenecks\u201d in the\nprocess, amongst other measures. [19] As of the end\nof April, 82 per cent of applications in Greece for\nrelocation were by Syrians. [20] Afghan nationals, the\nsecond largest group that arrived in Greece in 2016,\nhave not been eligible for relocation under this programme. [21] Many may therefore choose to move on\nirregularly from Greece. So far in 2017, 19,575 people have lodged new asylum applications in Greece\ncompared to 9,281 by the end of April 2016, a 111 per\n\n\n16 UNHCR, _Stronger Cooperation Crucial to Ensure Sustainable_\n_Refugee Response in Greece \u2013 UNHCR,_ 27 March 2017, [http://www.unhcr.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d8f15a4/stronger-cooperation-crucial-ensure-sustainable-refugee-response-greece.html)\n[org/news/press/2017/3/58d8f15a4/stronger-cooperation-crucial-ensure-sus-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d8f15a4/stronger-cooperation-crucial-ensure-sustainable-refugee-response-greece.html)\n[tainable-refugee-response-greece.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d8f15a4/stronger-cooperation-crucial-ensure-sustainable-refugee-response-greece.html)\n17 In 2016, almost 5,000 refugees, including 700 unaccompanied children, in Greece applied to be reunified with family members elsewhere in the\nEU. Of these, only 1,107 had reached their destination country by the end of\nthe year. See UNICEF, _Refugee and migrant children stranded in European_\n_transit countries suffer psychologically in the face of uncertain future \u2013_\n_UNICEF,_ 4 May 2017, [https://www.unicef.org/media/media_95938.html](https://www.unicef.org/media/media_95938.html)\n18  In September 2015, the EU agreed on a two-year plan to relocate\nasylum-seekers from Greece and Italy to other EU Member States. Under this\nplan, 66,400 asylum-seekers were foreseen to be relocated from Greece,\nand 39,600 from Italy.\n19 European Commission, _Relocation and Resettlement: Steady Prog-_\n_ress Made but more Efforts Needed to Meet Targets_, 12 April 2017, [http://](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-908_en.htm)\n[europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-908_en.htm](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-908_en.htm)\n20 Greek Asylum Service, _Statistical Data of the Greek Asylum Service_\n\n_\u2013 Relocation Procedures,_ [30 April 2017, http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/](http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Relocation-procedures-up-to-30-04-17_en-.pdf)\n[uploads/2017/05/Relocation-procedures-up-to-30-04-17_en-.pdf](http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Relocation-procedures-up-to-30-04-17_en-.pdf)\n21  Nationalities that have at least a 75 per cent recognition rate at first\ninstance across the EU (based on the latest Eurostat quarterly statistics) are\neligible for relocation.\n\n\n\ncent increase, with most new applications lodged\nby Syrians, Afghans, Pakistanis and Iraqis.\n\n\nPeople intending to travel on irregularly require\nmoney to do so, including to pay smugglers, and\nseveral reports have highlighted the involvement of\nsome refugees and migrants including children in\nsurvival sex in Athens, including to make money in\norder to travel onwards irregularly. [22]\n\n\nRefugees and migrants travelling irregularly through\nthe region continue to face severe risks with several deaths reported since the start of the year and\nmany reporting push-backs, [23] including the use of\nviolence by state officials, despite UNHCR\u2019s public call in February for countries along the Western\nBalkans route to cease these practices. [24] UNHCR\nremains extremely concerned by such practices,\nincluding the alleged use of violence by state officials and denial of access to asylum procedures, as\nthese often place the lives of refugees and migrants\nat heightened risk and violate their most fundamental rights. A joint NGO report issued in March noted\nthat unaccompanied children crossing through the\nregion face a \u201cvery high risk of violence, including\n\n\n22  FXB Centre for Health and Human Rights, Harvard University, _Emer-_\n_gency within an Emergency: The Growing Epidemic of Sexual Exploitation_\n_and Abuse of Migrant Children in Greece,_ [April 2017, https://cdn2.sph.har-](https://cdn2.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/04/Emergency-Within-an-Emergency-FXB.pdf)\n[vard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/04/Emergency-Within-an-Emer-](https://cdn2.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/04/Emergency-Within-an-Emergency-FXB.pdf)\n[gency-FXB.pdf;](https://cdn2.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/04/Emergency-Within-an-Emergency-FXB.pdf) Al Jazeera, _Afghan asylum seekers resort to sex work in_\n_Athens,_ [16 January 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/01/](http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/01/afghan-asylum-seekers-resort-sex-work-athens-170112082810485.html)\n[afghan-asylum-seekers-resort-sex-work-athens-170112082810485.html](http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/01/afghan-asylum-seekers-resort-sex-work-athens-170112082810485.html)\n23 See also Medicins Sans Frontiers, _Serbia: MSF denounces the_\n_widespread violence on migrants and refugees at the Serbian/Hungarian_\n_border_, 9 March 2017 [http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounc-](http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounces-widespread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border)\n[es-widespread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border;](http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounces-widespread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border)\nBelgrade Centre for Human Rights, Macedonian Young Layers Association\nand Oxfam, _A Dangerous \u2018Game\u2019: The pushback of migrants, including_\n_refugees, at Europe\u2019s borders_ [, April 2017, https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf)\n[oxfam.org/fles/fle_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-ref-](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf)\n[ugees-060417-en_0.pdf and Atina, Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, CIM,](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf)\nIdeas, Info Park, International Rescue Committee, NSHC, Open Gate, PIN,\nPraxis, Save the Children, Terres des Hommes, _Out of Sight, Exploited and_\n_Alone,_ March 2017, [https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/fles/document/1489/](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n[outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n24 UNHCR, _Refugees and migrants face high risks in winter_\n_weather in Europe,_ [13 January 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/news/brief-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/1/58789f624/refugees-migrants-face-high-risks-winter-weather-europe.html)\n[ing/2017/1/58789f624/refugees-migrants-face-high-risks-winter-weather-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/1/58789f624/refugees-migrants-face-high-risks-winter-weather-europe.html)\n[europe.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/1/58789f624/refugees-migrants-face-high-risks-winter-weather-europe.html)\n\n\n\nMONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS IN GREECE BY COUNTRY OF ORIGIN - JAN TO APR 2017\n\n\n800\n\n\n\n700\n\n\n600\n\n\n500\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n109 104\n\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr\n\nGreece\n\n\n\n678\n\n\n163\n\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\n\nIraq\n\n\n\n447\n\n\n185\n\n\n\n413\n\n\n\n434\n\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic 413 434 678 447\n\nIraq 109 104 163 185\n\nAlgeria 198 39 41 56\n\nCongo, Democratic Republic of the 118 89 51 42\n\nPalestine 142 33 63 35\n\n\nArrival figures for Greece are provided by the Hellenic Coast Guard and Police. All figures are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nsexual and gender-based violence.\u201d [25] This includes\nviolence at the hands of smugglers or police.\n\n\nSince the start of the year, seven refugees and migrants have died at different points while crossing\nthrough the Western Balkans. These have included\na Pakistani man who died in the Serbian mountains\nin early February while crossing from Bulgaria after\nbeing abandoned by smugglers, [26] an Afghan boy\ntrying to cross the frozen Tisza River on the Serbia-Hungary border who fell in and drowned when\nthe ice cracked, as well as two decomposing bodies\nbelieved to be refugees or migrants found in the river by Serbian authorities at the same border on 8\nMarch. Also in March, an Algerian man succumbed\nto his injuries after he and three others were badly\nhurt when they accidentally triggered an explosion\non a train transporting fuel as they tried to irregularly cross from Serbia to Croatia. In addition, refugees continue to report abuses by smugglers and\n\n\n25 Atina et al, _Out of Sight, Exploited and Alone,_ March 2017, [https://](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n[www.rescue.org/sites/default/fles/document/1489/outofsightexploit-](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n[edandaloneweb.pdf](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n26 UNHCR, _Serbia Update: 09-12 Feb_ [2017, February 2017, https://](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53721)\n\n\n\ncriminal gangs at several points along their journey\nthrough the Western Balkans.\n\n\nFrom Greece, most refugees and migrants who travel onwards irregularly do so by land, primarily via\nthe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, to Serbia. However, the majority of those apprehended\nare pushed back to Greece. Between January and\nApril, UNHCR was informed of over 1,300 refugees\nand migrants being pushed back from the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia to Greece. Refugees and migrants travelling through the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia have also reported several robberies by criminal groups at different\npoints across the country with multiple incidents reported in March.\n\n\nA less-commonly used route is from Greece to Albania and then either on through Montenegro or\nKosovo (S/RES/1244(1999)), [27] mostly to Serbia (although several persons have been apprehended in\nBosnia-Herzegovina since the start of the year after\nreportedly crossing from Montenegro and seeking\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nChildren play at a \u2018transit zone\u2019 where asylum-seekers are detained on Hungary\u2019s border with Serbia in April 2017\n\n\n\n\n\nto travel on to Croatia). Most of those apprehended in Albania since the start of the year have been\nSyrians.\n\n\nOthers moving on from Greece have crossed the\nsea to Italy. Since the start of 2017, 223 persons,\nmostly from Iraq, are known to have travelled on\nthis way. A further 181 persons mostly from Iraq are\nknown to have been intercepted by the Hellenic\nCoast Guard in three incidents while attempting to\ncross the sea from Greece to Italy.\n\n\nOnward movement from Bulgaria also continues\nand as of the end of April, Bulgarian border officials\nhave apprehended 1,642 refugees and migrants, 59\nper cent from Afghanistan, attempting to depart irregularly in 2017, primarily along the Bulgaria-Serbia\nborder. These numbers have been swelled by some\nof the same individuals making multiple attempts to\ndepart irregularly. Of the 1,642 however, only 154 (9\nper cent) had not been previously registered by Bulgarian authorities, an 85 per cent decrease in the\nnumber of previously unregistered persons apprehended at exit points compared to the same period\nlast year.\n\n\nFrom the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,\nBulgaria, Kosovo (S/RES/1244(1999)), and Montenegro, most hope to transit Serbia en route to re-entering the EU, primarily via Hungary. Since the start of\nthe year, UNHCR and partners in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria have encountered several hundred refugees and migrants\nwho have been pushed back from Serbia. Some of\nthose encountered in the former Yugoslav Repub\n\n6\n\n\n\nlic of Macedonia have reported being pushed back\nfrom Hungary and then subsequently pushed back\nfrom Serbia. Since the start of 2017, UNHCR and\npartners in Serbia have encountered over 2,000\nnew arrivals in the country. Most of those encountered reported crossing from Bulgaria with fewer reporting crossing from the former Yugoslav Republic\nof Macedonia.\n\n\nThe number of refugees and migrants in Serbia\ncontinued to increase to almost 8,000 at the end of\nMarch before dropping to 7,364 at the end of April.\nAs of 30 April, the majority of refugees and migrants\nin Serbia were accommodated at Serbian government facilities across the country, but over 1,000 remained in extremely hazardous conditions including\nin disused warehouses in Belgrade after choosing\nnot to move to government shelters. Over 900 unaccompanied or separated children were in Serbia\nat the end of April with 820 in government shelters\nbut the remainder were still living in very concerning conditions. According to available data, of those\nin government shelters, 42 per cent were men, 15\nper cent women, and 43 per cent children with 57\nper cent from Afghanistan, 19 per cent from Iraq, 13\nper cent from Pakistan, and 6 per cent from Syria.\nBetween January and April 2017, 2,345 persons registered their intention to seek asylum in Serbia and\n92 subsequently submitted asylum applications. So\nfar in 2017, due in part to the lack of a review board\nuntil April, Serbian authorities have only processed\none asylum application and have not yet granted\nrefugee status or subsidiary protection to anyone.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nRefugees and migrants in Serbia continue to report\nmultiple risks, including at the hands of smugglers.\nIn April, ten people from Afghanistan and Pakistan,\nincluding four unaccompanied children, were found\nin an abandoned vehicle near Nis. Four were already\nunconscious, and most required hospitalization due\nto the cramped and suffocating conditions they had\nbeen transported in. [28] Media reports suggest that\nsome boys in Belgrade have become involved in\nsurvival sex in order to earn enough money to pay\nsmugglers to take them elsewhere [29] but UNHCR\nand its partners have not been able to confirm this.\nUNHCR in Serbia has also received multiple reports\nof refugees and migrants being pushed back by\nneighbouring states, sometimes violently.\n\n\nIn late January, Hungary again reduced the number\nof asylum-seekers admitted each day via the two\n\u2018transit zones\u2019 on its border with Serbia to 10 (from\n30 per day in mid-2016) so that only around 50 asylum-seekers are admitted each week. The selection\nof those to be admitted to the \u2018transit zones\u2019 each\nday is not transparent and UNHCR demarches to\nfacilitate a tripartite dialogue have not yet been responded to. As of the end of April, those admitted\nto the \u2018transit zones\u2019 reported waiting up to eight\nmonths in Serbia to be admitted. Asylum-seekers\nadmitted to Hungary since the start of the year have\ntold UNHCR of the multiple hardships endured at\ndifferent points on their journey so far. Some have\nreported surviving their boat capsizing between\nGreece and Turkey, being pushed back multiple\ntimes across borders (sometimes violently), and\nbeing packed so tightly with others into vehicles by\nsmugglers it was difficult to breathe for a journey of\nseveral hours.\n\n\nSince the start of the year, Hungarian authorities\nhave admitted just 1,004 asylum-seekers and have\nconstructed an additional fence to further reduce\nirregular entries. [30] At the end of March, Hungary implemented its new law providing for the detention\nof all asylum-seekers, including children, for the duration of the asylum procedures. UNHCR has stated\npublicly that this new law violates Hungary\u2019s obligations under international and EU law. [31] UNHCR has\nalso since called for EU Member States to temporarily suspend Dublin returns to Hungary due to the\nworsening situation for asylum-seekers in the country. [32] The European Commission has subsequently\nmoved forward on infringement procedures against\nHungary over its asylum legislation. [33]\n\n\nRefugees and migrants continue to try to cross\ninto Hungary irregularly and as of the end of April\nHungarian police have reported preventing 4,595\n\n\n28 UNHCR, _Serbia Update: 24-30 April 2017_ [, April 2017, https://data2.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56240)\n[unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56240](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56240)\n29 Reuters, _Penniless and alone, migrant children in Serbia sell sex_\n_to survive,_ 22 February 2017, [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-mi-](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-serbia-sex-idUSKBN15V1KH)\n[grants-serbia-sex-idUSKBN15V1KH](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-serbia-sex-idUSKBN15V1KH)\n30 Reuters, _Hungary builds new high-tech border fence \u2013 with few_\n_migrants in sight,_ [2 March 2017, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-mi-](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-hungary-fence-idUSKBN1692MH)\n[grants-hungary-fence-idUSKBN1692MH](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-hungary-fence-idUSKBN1692MH)\n31 UNHCR, _UNHCR deeply concerned by Hungary plans to detain_\n_all asylum seekers,_ [7 March 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/news/brief-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asylum-seekers.html)\n[ing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asy-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asylum-seekers.html)\n[lum-seekers.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asylum-seekers.html)\n32 UNHCR, _UNHCR urges suspension of transfers of asylum-seek-_\n_ers to Hungary under Dublin,_ 10 April 2017, [http://www.unhcr.org/news/](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/4/58eb7e454/unhcr-urges-suspension-transfers-asylum-seekers-hungary-under-dublin.html)\n[press/2017/4/58eb7e454/unhcr-urges-suspension-transfers-asylum-seek-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/4/58eb7e454/unhcr-urges-suspension-transfers-asylum-seekers-hungary-under-dublin.html)\n[ers-hungary-under-dublin.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/4/58eb7e454/unhcr-urges-suspension-transfers-asylum-seekers-hungary-under-dublin.html)\n33 European Commission, _Commission follows up on infringement_\n_procedure against Hungary concerning its asylum law,_ [17 May 2017, http://](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1285_en.htm)\n[europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1285_en.htm](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1285_en.htm)\n\n\n7\n\n\n\npersons from crossing from Serbia since January.\nIn addition, Hungarian police have reported apprehending and returning to the other side of the\nborder fence at the Serbian border a further 2,928\npersons. Persons apprehended and returned this\nway are not provided with any form of individualized screening and are not granted access to asylum procedures. Since January, UNHCR has also\nreceived multiple reports in which refugees and\nmigrants allege mistreatment including having cold\nwater poured on them and having to remove warm\nclothing and shoes in the middle of winter, as well\nas the use of violence, which sometimes required\nmedical attention. [34] Similar allegations have also\nbeen reported by humanitarian groups. [35]\n\n\nSmaller numbers of refugees and migrants continue\nto try to depart Serbia irregularly to Croatia, including at times in trains and trucks. Since January, UNHCR has received reports of hundreds of persons\nbeing pushed back from the Croatia-Serbia border\nor elsewhere in Croatia, including those that had expressed their intention to seek asylum but were still\nirregularly returned to Serbia, and some that alleged\nthe use of violence. [36] In February, the Croatian Ministry of Interior pledged to investigate allegations of\nmistreatment by police at the Serbian border. [37]\n\n\nFollowing the new Hungarian regulations introducing mandatory detention for asylum-seekers as of\nthe end of March, along with the additional border\nfence along the Hungary-Serbia border, irregular\nentries to Romania from Serbia have increased dramatically from nine in January and 41 in February to\n333 in March and 609 in April, the highest recorded\nby Romanian border authorities in a single month\nsince at least the start of 2016. Many of those apprehended were from Syria and Iraq. UNHCR has\nreceived several allegations of push-backs from Romania since the start of the year.\n\n\nAs a result of difficulties continuing onwards from\nSerbia, some refugees and migrants have also started to return from Serbia to Greece via the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia. So far, the numbers known to be making this journey are small with\nmany simply requesting assistance from border police to be informally returned to the other side of\nthe border before then repeating this request at the\nnext border until they reach Greece.\n\n\n34 UNHCR, _Serbia Update: 06-08 March 2017,_ [March 2017, https://](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54240)\n[data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54240; UNHCR,](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54240) _Serbia Update:_\n_23-26 Feb 2017,_ [February 2017, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/down-](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53909)\n[load/53909; UNHCR,](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53909) _Serbia Update: 20-22 February 2017,_ February 2017,\n[https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53877.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53877)\n35 Medicins Sans Frontiers, _Serbia: MSF denounces the widespread_\n_violence on migrants and refugees at the Serbian/Hungarian border_, 9\n[March 2017, http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounces-wide-](http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounces-widespread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border)\n[spread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border; Belgrade](http://www.msf.org/en/article/serbia-msf-denounces-widespread-violence-migrants-and-refugees-serbianhungarian-border)\nCentre for Human Rights, Macedonian Young Layers Association and Oxfam,\n_A Dangerous \u2018Game\u2019: The pushback of migrants, including refugees, at_\n_Europe\u2019s borders_ [, April 2017, https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf)\n[fles/fle_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf)\n[060417-en_0.pdf; Atina et al,](https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-dangerous-game-pushback-migrants-refugees-060417-en_0.pdf) _Out of Sight, Exploited and Alone,_ March 2017,\n[https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/fles/document/1489/outofsightexploit-](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf)\n[edandaloneweb.pdf and Fresh Response,](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1489/outofsightexploitedandaloneweb.pdf) _Violence at the Hungarian Border,_\n[11 March 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYxb2rtAohQ&t=138s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYxb2rtAohQ&t=138s)\n36 UNHCR, _Serbia Update: 27 Feb-01 Mar 2017,_ [March 2017, https://](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54003)\n[data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54003; UNHCR,](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/54003) _Serbia Update:_\n_16-19 Feb 2017,_ [February 2017, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/down-](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53816)\n[load/53816; UNHCR,](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53816) _Serbia Update: 06-08 Feb 2017,_ [February 2017, https://](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53657)\n[data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53657.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53657)\n37 Vecernji list, _Orepi\u0107: Ako je netko prekora\u010dio ovlasti, taj \u010dovjek vi\u0161e_\n_ne\u0107e biti policajac hrvatske policije,_ 9 February 2017, [http://www.vecernji.hr/](http://www.vecernji.hr/hrvatska/vlaho-orepic-ako-je-netko-prekoracio-ovlasti-taj-covjek-vise-nece-biti-policajac-hrvatske-policije-1148453)\n[hrvatska/vlaho-orepic-ako-je-netko-prekoracio-ovlasti-taj-covjek-vise-nece-](http://www.vecernji.hr/hrvatska/vlaho-orepic-ako-je-netko-prekoracio-ovlasti-taj-covjek-vise-nece-biti-policajac-hrvatske-policije-1148453)\n[biti-policajac-hrvatske-policije-1148453](http://www.vecernji.hr/hrvatska/vlaho-orepic-ako-je-netko-prekoracio-ovlasti-taj-covjek-vise-nece-biti-policajac-hrvatske-policije-1148453)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "reports",
-          "confidence": 0.8920021653175354,
-          "start": 759,
-          "end": 760
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and\nmigrants",
-          "confidence": 0.9320295453071594,
-          "start": 762,
-          "end": 765
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "quired rescue over the Easter weekend. [38]\n\n\nRescuers operating in international waters off the\ncoast of Libya and often working in difficult conditions continue to save thousands of lives each\nmonth. In early May, UNHCR\u2019s High Commissioner,\nFilippo Grandi, stated that saving lives must be the\ntop priority for all and called for further efforts to\n\n\n38 UNHCR Regional Office of Southern Europe, _Italy Sea Arrivals_\n_Dashboard: January \u2013 April 2017,_ [April 2017, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56593)\n[documents/download/56593](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56593)\n\n\n\ngees and migrants rescued at sea, Italian authorities\nhave rescued 34 per cent, commercial vessels 16\nper cent, EUNAVFOR Med 9 per cent, and Frontex\n7 per cent. [40]\n\n\n39 UNHCR, _News comment by the United Nations High Commissioner_\n_for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, on Mediterranean crossings over the weekend,_\n7 May 2017, [http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/590f216a4/news-com-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/590f216a4/news-comment-united-nations-high-commissioner-refugees-filippo-grandi-mediterranean.html)\n[ment-united-nations-high-commissioner-refugees-flippo-grandi-mediterra-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/590f216a4/news-comment-united-nations-high-commissioner-refugees-filippo-grandi-mediterranean.html)\n[nean.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/590f216a4/news-comment-united-nations-high-commissioner-refugees-filippo-grandi-mediterranean.html)\n40  This excludes Italian vessels co-financed by Frontex. See Italian\nCoast Guard, _Attivit\u00e0 S.A.R. (Search and Rescue) nel Mediterraneo Centrale:_\n_Aprile 2017,_ [April 2017, http://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/attivita/Documents/](http://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/attivita/Documents/attivita-sar-immigrazione-2017/Aprile%20ita.pdf)\n[attivita-sar-immigrazione-2017/Aprile%20ita.pdf](http://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/attivita/Documents/attivita-sar-immigrazione-2017/Aprile%20ita.pdf)\n\n\n### _Saving lives must be the top priority for all and, in_ _light of the recent increase in arrivals, I urge further_ _efforts to rescue people along this dangerous route._\n# \u201c\n\n[UNHCR High Commissioner Filippo Grandi, May 2017](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/590f216a4/news-comment-united-nations-high-commissioner-refugees-filippo-grandi-mediterranean.html)\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nBetween January and April 2017, the top five countries of origin of arrivals by sea to Italy have been Nigeria (14 per cent), Bangladesh (12 per cent), Guinea\n(11 per cent), C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire (11 per cent), and Gambia\n(8 per cent). Since February, Bangladeshi arrivals\nhave increased significantly with many reported to\narrive in Libya by plane. [41] Mitiga airport in Tripoli has\nsince banned the entry of Bangladeshi nationals as\nwell as nationals of Syria, Sudan, Egypt and Morocco. [42]\n\n\nEritreans, the second largest group arriving in Italy in 2016, arrived in greater numbers in March and\nApril and make up the ninth largest group to arrive\nby sea in Italy so far in 2017. However, arrival patterns of specific groups in Italy do not necessarily\ncorrespond with movement by such groups to Libya as many arrivals continue to report being held\nin detention, including by non-governmental actors\nfor forced labour, for many months prior to being released and being able to cross to Italy.\n\n\nIn the first four months of the year, most arrivals\n\n\n41 The Independent, _Bangladesh is now the single biggest country_\n_of origin for refugees on boats as new route to Europe emerges,_ 5 May\n[2017, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugee-crisis-mi-](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugee-crisis-migrants-bangladesh-libya-italy-numbers-smuggling-dhaka-dubai-turkey-detained-a7713911.html)\n[grants-bangladesh-libya-italy-numbers-smuggling-dhaka-dubai-turkey-de-](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugee-crisis-migrants-bangladesh-libya-italy-numbers-smuggling-dhaka-dubai-turkey-detained-a7713911.html)\n[tained-a7713911.html](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugee-crisis-migrants-bangladesh-libya-italy-numbers-smuggling-dhaka-dubai-turkey-detained-a7713911.html)\n42 Libyan Express, _Mitiga airport authorities ban entries of five_\n_countries\u2019 nationals to Tripoli,_ 8 May 2017, [http://www.libyanexpress.com/](http://www.libyanexpress.com/mitiga-airport-authorities-ban-entries-of-five-countries-to-tripoli/)\n[mitiga-airport-authorities-ban-entries-of-fve-countries-to-tripoli/](http://www.libyanexpress.com/mitiga-airport-authorities-ban-entries-of-five-countries-to-tripoli/)\n\n\n\nwere men (75 per cent), with 10 per cent of arrivals\nadult women, 14 per cent unaccompanied or separated children (UASC), and 1 per cent accompanied\nchildren. As of the end of April, 5,190 UASC had\nreached Italy. Most were from Bangladesh, Guinea,\nIvory Coast, and The Gambia. While UASC comprise\na slightly lower proportion of arrivals (14 per cent)\ncompared to the same period last year (16 per cent),\ntheir numbers have increased 14 per cent from 4,541\nin the first four months of 2016. Of the 795 Bangladeshi UASC that arrived so far in 2017, 306 (38 per\ncent) arrived in April. The proportions of UASC have\nbeen particularly high amongst Iraqi arrivals (33 per\ncent) as well as Somali nationals (28 per cent). [43]\n\n\nIn the first four months of the year, most women arriving by sea were from Nigeria and C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire.\nThey made up 30 per cent of Nigerian arrivals and\n13 per cent of Ivoirian arrivals. In addition to Nigerians, the proportion of women amongst arrivals was\nalso highest amongst arrivals from Cameroon (22\nper cent), Somalia (21 per cent) and Eritrea, Syria,\nand Iraq (17 per cent each). [44] In 2016, IOM estimated\nthat around 80 per cent of Nigerian women arriving\n\n\n43 UNHCR Regional Office for Southern Europe, _Italy \u2013 Unaccompa-_\n_nied and Separated Children (UASC) Dashboard,_ April 2017, [https://data2.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56594)\n[unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56594](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56594)\n44 UNHCR Regional Office for Southern Europe, _Italy Sea Arrivals_\n_Dashboard: January \u2013 April 2017_ [, April 2017, https://data2.unhcr.org/en/](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56593)\n[documents/download/56593](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/56593)\n\n\n\nMONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY 2013 - APR 2017\n\n\n\n30,000\n\n\n25,000\n\n\n20,000\n\n\n15,000\n\n\n10,000\n\n\n5,000\n\n\n     \n\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec\n\n\n2013 2014 2015 2016 2017\n\n\n9\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UASC",
-          "confidence": 0.8163006901741028,
-          "start": 317,
-          "end": 318
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Iraqi arrivals",
-          "confidence": 0.6641577482223511,
-          "start": 433,
-          "end": 435
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "_Italy Sea Arrivals_\n_Dashboard",
-          "confidence": 0.5474495887756348,
-          "start": 604,
-          "end": 608
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Southern Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.7568426728248596,
-          "start": 601,
-          "end": 603
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017_",
-          "confidence": 0.6403810381889343,
-          "start": 612,
-          "end": 613
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nPERCENTAGE OF RESCUES CONDUCTED - JANUARY TO APRIL 2016 AND 2017\n\n\n40%\n\n35%\n\n30%\n\n25%\n\n20%\n\n15%\n\n10%\n\n5%\n\n\n\n0%\n\n\n\nItalian Coast Guard Italian Navy Frontex Commercial\n\nvessels\n\n\nJan-Apr 2016 Jan-Apr 2017\n\n\n\nNGOs EUNAVFOR Med Guardia di Finanza\n\n\n_Source: Italian Coast Guard_\n\n\n\nIn the first four months of 2017, 1,019 persons have\nbeen reported dead or missing in the Central Mediterranean [47] compared to 970 in the same period\nlast year. This amounts to one death for every 36\npersons who reached Italy compared to one death\nfor every 29 persons who crossed in the first four\nmonths of 2016. So far in 2017 there have been\neight incidents in which 50 or more persons are\nthought to have died in a single incident. All but\nthree of these appear to have occurred within Libyan waters. In the incident in which the most persons\ndied, a group of an estimated 176 persons, mainly\nfrom Eritrea, are thought to have drowned on 14\nJanuary in international waters after the motors of\nthe yacht they were on board broke several hours\nafter departure and the boat sank trapping many on\nboard. While some survived the initial sinking, they\nultimately succumbed to exhaustion and the icy sea\nwith just four survivors rescued 11 hours after the\nboat sank.\n\n\n47 UNHCR, _News comment by Volker T\u00fcrk, UNHCR\u2019s Assistant_\n_High Commissioner for Protection, on new Mediterranean shipwreck,_\n[29 March 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58dbc6b04/](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58dbc6b04/news-comment-volker-turk-unhcrs-assistant-high-commissioner-protection.html)\n[news-comment-volker-turk-unhcrs-assistant-high-commissioner-protec-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58dbc6b04/news-comment-volker-turk-unhcrs-assistant-high-commissioner-protection.html)\n[tion.html; UNHCR,](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58dbc6b04/news-comment-volker-turk-unhcrs-assistant-high-commissioner-protection.html) _News Comment from Vincent Cochetel, Director of_\n_UNHCR\u2019s Europe bureau,_ [23 March 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/news/](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d440254/news-comment-vincent-cochetel-director-unhcrs-europe-bureau.html)\n[press/2017/3/58d440254/news-comment-vincent-cochetel-director-un-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d440254/news-comment-vincent-cochetel-director-unhcrs-europe-bureau.html)\n[hcrs-europe-bureau.html.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/3/58d440254/news-comment-vincent-cochetel-director-unhcrs-europe-bureau.html)\n\n\n\nRead more about sea\narrivals to Italy:\n\n\n\nby sea in Italy may be victims of trafficking. [45] UNHCR also continues to hear accounts indicating that\nmany women arriving in Italy have been victims of\nsexual violence at some point on their journey.\n\n\nLibya continues to be the primary departure point\nfor almost all with 97 per cent having left from there.\nThe Libyan Coast Guard reported having intercepted and rescued 3,509 persons in the first four\nmonths of 2017. [46] Those intercepted and rescued\nare then sent back to detention centres. In recent\nmonths, smugglers appear to have been driving up\nbusiness by reporting that departures are likely to\nbecome more restricted due to new agreements\nbetween Libya and the EU. At the same time, it\nhas also been reported that prices for some have\ndropped and provided an incentive for people to attempt the crossing in adverse weather conditions.\nSome new arrivals also continue to report being\nforced onto boats at gunpoint while others have\nreported being intercepted at sea by rival smuggling groups. No large vessels have yet arrived from\nEgypt this year.\n\n\n45 The Guardian, _Number of Nigerian women trafficked to Italy for sex_\n_almost doubled in 2016,_ [12 January 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/glob-](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafficked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016)\n[al-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafcked-to-italy-for-sex-dou-](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafficked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016)\n[bled-2016](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafficked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016)\n46 UNHCR, _Libya: Rescue at sea, monthly update,_ [April 2017, https://](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/unhcr_libya_rescue_at_sea_apr_2017.pdf)\n[www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/fles/documents/fles/unhcr_lib-](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/unhcr_libya_rescue_at_sea_apr_2017.pdf)\n[ya_rescue_at_sea_apr_2017.pdf](https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/unhcr_libya_rescue_at_sea_apr_2017.pdf)\n\n\n\nSEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY: TOP 5 COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN - JAN - APR 2017\n\n\n2,500\n\n\n2,000\n\n\n1,500\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n500\n\n\n0\n\nJan 17 Feb 17 Mar 17 Apr 17\nNigeria 483 1,204 1,472 2,094\nBangladesh 224 1,079 1,528 1,814\nGuinea 796 1,296 1,076 1,016\nC\u00f4te d'Ivoire 839 806 882 1,393\nThe Gambia 359 885 988 618\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "SEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY",
-          "confidence": 0.6972268223762512,
-          "start": 610,
-          "end": 614
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.9726937413215637,
-          "start": 624,
-          "end": 625
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.6111626029014587,
-          "start": 624,
-          "end": 625
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nFactors contributing to the high number of deaths\ninclude overloading of boats, the longer sea journey\ncompared to other routes, the poor quality of inflatable vessels used, low prices offered to encourage\nmore to travel despite rough sea conditions, lack of\nmeans for many boats to communicate their positions when in distress, and detention and mistreatment in Libya resulting in some persons being critically ill prior to departure and later succumbing to\ntheir injuries or poor health. Children too continue\nto be amongst the casualties at sea, including two\nunaccompanied brothers of 8 and 5 who were trampled to death in January as other passengers on\nboard the overcrowded boat panicked while awaiting rescue.\n\n\nIn 2017, the trend of more persons staying in Italy\nand seeking asylum has continued, including due to\nimprovements to the Italian asylum system as well\nas tightened border controls by Italy\u2019s neighbours.\nAs of the end of April, there were over 175,000 refugees and migrants accommodated at reception\ncentres around the country. In addition, in the first\nfour months of 2017, 47,456 persons applied for asylum compared to 30,290 who lodged applications in\nthe first four months of 2016, a 57 per cent increase.\nOf the 23,106 applications determined during that\nperiod, 42 per cent were granted some form of protection with 18 per cent were granted international\nprotection (9 per cent refugee status and 9 per cent\nsubsidiary protection) while humanitarian protection\nwas granted to 24 per cent of applicants.\n\n\nA total of 5,363 asylum-seekers had been relocated\nunder the EU\u2019s Emergency Relocation Mechanism\nas of the end of April after 19 months of the pro\n\n\ngramme. However, the majority of nationalities arriving by sea in Italy are ineligible for the programme.\nFollowing tighter border controls by Italy\u2019s neighbours to prevent onward movement since mid2016, at least six refugees and migrants are known\nto have been killed trying to depart Italy since the\nstart of the year, making a total of 12 killed since\nOctober 2016, the majority of which have been at\nthe France-Italy border. In contrast, no deaths were\nrecorded in the first four months of 2016.\n\n\nSince the start of the year, at the France-Italy border, a Libyan man was knocked down by a vehicle\nin Ventimiglia on 4 January, while on 5 February an\nAlgerian man was killed by a train as he walked towards the border along the train tracks near Ventimiglia. On 17 February, the body of a man believed\nto have been a refugee or migrant was found dead\non top of a train at Cannes station that had arrived\nfrom Ventimiglia while on 21 March the body of a\nSudanese man was recovered in France after he fell\nfrom a cliff while walking along a particularly dangerous route between Ventimiglia and the French\ntown of Menton. Lastly, on 22 March, an Afghan\nman fell from the Ponte Sal Luigi bridge in Ventimiglia shortly after having been returned to Italy by\nFrench authorities. At the Switzerland-Italy border,\na 20-year-old Malian national was electrocuted on a\ntrain on 27 February while another person was seriously injured in the same manner near Chiasso on\n19 March. At the France-Italy and Switzerland-Italy\nborders, refugees and migrants attempting to depart from Italy continue to be sent back, including\nUASC, and so many resort to riskier ways to try to\ncross the border.\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nPRIMARY COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF SEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY BY GENDER AND AGE JAN - APR 2017\n\n\n                                                                                     - Accompanied children **Unaccompanied and Separated Children\n\nArrival figures for Italy are provided by the Italian Ministry of Interior. Figures are subject to future adjustment and should not be considered final.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n### WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Sea arrivals to mainland<br>3,072<br>Melilla arrivals<br>1,150|Col2|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n|Melilla arrivals<br>**1,150**<br>Sea arrivals to mainland<br>**3,072**|Melilla arrivals<br>**1,150**|Melilla arrivals<br>**1,150**|\n|Melilla arrivals<br>**1,150**<br>Sea arrivals to mainland<br>**3,072**|Melilla arrivals<br>**1,150**||\n\n\n\nSea crossings from North Africa to Spain continue\nto rise with 3,072 persons crossing to the Spanish\nmainland by sea in the first four months of 2017\ncompared to 1,102 in the same period in 2016 (a\n179 per cent increase). Most people are presently\ncrossing through the Alboran Sea with around 3040 people in most boats (but sometimes up to 65).\nMost boats cross from Morocco and those coming\nfrom Algeria (a far smaller number) are usually carrying only Algerians. In the Straits of Gibraltar, the\ncrossing appears to be more dangerous with people seeming to travel in bad weather conditions to\navoid detection by Moroccan authorities. So far,\nmost of the deaths in the Western Mediterranean\nhave been in the Straits of Gibraltar. As of the end of\nApril, 48 deaths had been recorded in the Western\nMediterranean compared to 25 in the same period\nin 2016 (a 92 per cent increase) and amounting to\none death for every 64 persons who were able to\ncross to the Spanish mainland, a lower rate than in\nthe Central Mediterranean.\n\n\nA further 2,314 people entered the two enclaves\nof Melilla and Ceuta since the start of 2017, an increase of 36 per cent from the 1,707 that entered\n\n\n\nthe enclaves irregularly in the same period in 2016.\nIn February, 927 people entered Ceuta irregularly\nby land with hundreds crossing in two attempts in\nthree days in mid-February compared to 84 in January, 63 in March, and 38 in April. Push-backs at the\nland borders continue to be recorded with at least\n500 people estimated to have been pushed back\nin 2017.\n\n\nOf the new arrivals in Spain, 21 per cent are from\nGuinea, 18 per cent from the Ivory Coast, 10 per cent\nfrom The Gambia, 10 per cent from Syria, and 10 per\ncent from Morocco. Persons from Sub-Saharan Africa crossing to Spain usually reported spending several months in Morocco before being able to cross.\nA number of UASC are arriving in Spain from Ivory\nCoast, The Gambia, Guinea and Morocco. Amongst\nthe women arriving, there are concerns of high rates\nof sexual violence and suspicions that many may\nhave been trafficked.\n\n\nBetween January and April 2017, 537 Syrians (plus\n40 Palestinians) arrived in Spain (almost all via\nMelilla). Syrians continue to arrive mostly in family\n\n\n\nTOP FIVE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF ARRIVALS TO SPAIN - JAN TO APR 2017\n\n600\n\n\n500\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nC\u00f4te d'Ivoire 275 203 195 202\n\nThe Gambia 168 138 150 89\n\nSyrian Arab Republic 125 118 138 154\n\nCameroon 25 381 12 19\n\n12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UASC",
-          "confidence": 0.731461763381958,
-          "start": 524,
-          "end": 525
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Sub-Saharan Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.5155094861984253,
-          "start": 503,
-          "end": 505
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.5714783668518066,
-          "start": 567,
-          "end": 568
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7073983550071716,
-          "start": 457,
-          "end": 458
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Syrians",
-          "confidence": 0.7120017409324646,
-          "start": 570,
-          "end": 571
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\ngroups, an increase of 33 per cent compared to the\nsame period last year. Of the 537 Syrian arrivals up\nto the end of April 2017, 28 per cent have been men,\n25 per cent women, and 47 per cent children. While\nmany of the newly-arrived Syrians have reported living in Algeria for some time, others have crossed\nto Spain as a means to try to reunify with family\nmembers already elsewhere in Europe. Those using\nthis route for reunification purposes have reported\nusing a diverse range of routes facing a series of\nrisks, including during irregular border crossings,\nhighlighting the need for greater access to family\nreunification as an alternative to families having to\nundertake such dangerous journeys. On 17 April,\ntwo groups of Syrians, including children, babies\nand two pregnant women, became stranded in dire\nconditions at the Algerian-Moroccan border after\nneither country would admit them.\n\n\nAs refugees and migrants wait to be transferred to\nthe mainland from the enclaves, overcrowded re\n\n\nception conditions in the enclaves continue to be\nof concern with over 1,000 waiting in the Ceuta reception centre, which has capacity for 510 persons,\nand 1,00 persons including 350 asylum-seekers and\n250 women and children, waiting in the Melilla reception centre, which has capacity for 490 persons,\nas of the end of April. In April, lesbian, gay, bisexual,\ntransgender, and intersex (LGBTI) asylum-seekers\nwaiting in Ceuta for transfer to the mainland reported facing harassment at the reception centre from\nother residents. [48] Around 50 LGBTI others in Melilla, where the majority have been waiting for over\na year for transfer to the mainland, have reported\nsimilar experiences.\n\n\n48 Human Rights Watch, _Spain: LGBT asylum seekers abused in North_\n_African enclave,_ [28 April 2017, https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/28/spain-](https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/28/spain-lgbt-asylum-seekers-abused-north-african-enclave)\n[lgbt-asylum-seekers-abused-north-african-enclave](https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/28/spain-lgbt-asylum-seekers-abused-north-african-enclave)\n\n\n\nSEA AND LAND ARRIVALS TO SPAIN 2015 - 2017\n\n\n1,400\n\n\n1,200\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n\n\n\n800\n\n\n600\n\n\n400\n\n\n200\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec\nLand 2015 1,276 602 793 1,142 866 932 863 862 1,032 1,079 945 588\nLand 2016 483 275 253 446 339 334 317 599 656 851 531 848\nLand 2017 331 1201 355 298\nSea 2015 264 44 280 243 512 414 380 417 621 1,059 557 492\nSea 2016 492 222 351 451 575 715 458 934 1248 1,110 854 752\nSea 2017 1000 475 842 849\n\n\nArrival figures for Spain are provided by Spanish Ministry of Interior and Spanish Police. Figures are subject to future adjustment and should not be considered final.\n\n\n\nin countries of first arrival in Europe. [52] In addition, EU\nMember States need to improve access to existing\nlegal mechanisms for those eligible to move from\none EU Member State to another, including through\nthe Emergency Relocation Mechanism and family\nreunion. UNHCR has called for measures, including\nthe consistent application of a broader definition of\nqualifying family links for family reunion purposes to\nalso include families formed in transit, siblings, adult\nchildren and parents of an adult.\n\n\nAs European States increase support to third countries, including to strengthen their management of\nborders and migration flows, it is critical that such\nactions do not result in any further hindrance to the\nright to seek and enjoy international protection, including in Europe.\n\n\nLastly, UNHCR calls for European States to stop border practices that are not in accordance with international and European law, including push-backs,\ndenial of access to asylum procedures, and use\nof violence by authorities, and instead ensure that\nthose in need of protection are identified and assisted by border authorities.\n\n\n52 See UNHCR, _Better Protecting Refugees in the EU and Globally,_\nDecember 2016, [http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html for detailed](http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html)\nrecommendations.\n\n\n#### CONCLUSION\n\n\n\nTo prevent the continuing rates of loss of life at Europe\u2019s external borders, including of those seeking\ninternational protection, European States need to\nexpand existing pathways as well as create credible complementary opportunities for safe and legal\nentry. This includes by increasing resettlement places, removing obstacles to family reunification, [49] and\nmaking available to refugees some of the mobility\nschemes foreseen in section 2 of the Valletta Summit action plan, [50] amongst other measures. UNHCR\nhas called for specific steps towards such efforts\nincluding expanding the scope of family reunification and for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection to\nhave access to family reunification under the same\nfavourable rules as those with refugee status. [51]\n\n\nIn order to reduce irregular onward movement, European States need to enhance the quality of reception conditions, facilitate family reunion within the\nEU under the Dublin Regulation, increase funding\nfor integration support as well as establish fair and\nefficient asylum determination procedures including\n\n\n49 UNHCR, _UNHCR Statement on the Senior Officials\u2019 Meeting_\n_on Migration in Valetta,_ 10 February 2017, [http://www.unhcr.org/news/](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/2/589dddb54/unhcr-statement-senior-officials-meeting-migration-valetta.html)\n[press/2017/2/589dddb54/unhcr-statement-senior-ofcials-meeting-migra-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/2/589dddb54/unhcr-statement-senior-officials-meeting-migration-valetta.html)\n[tion-valetta.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/2/589dddb54/unhcr-statement-senior-officials-meeting-migration-valetta.html)\n50 _2015 Valletta Summit on Migration Action Plan_, 12 November\n[2015, https://goo.gl/KAmyB7](https://goo.gl/KAmyB7)\n51 UNHCR, _Better Protecting Refugees in the EU and Globally,_ December 2016, [http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html](http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html)\n\n\n13\n\n\n\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/0818515f-47b7-3472-a72e-8c94cd4f0caf/57696.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_11/raw/doc_11_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,990 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n# FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN\n\n\n_Afghans have been enduring the adverse consequences of forced displacement for decades, way before_\n_the current \u201crefugee crisis\u201d gained the international spotlight with the surge of asylum seekers trying_\n_to escape conflict in Syria. Afghanistan is not only the country with the largest number of refugees_\n_in protracted exile, but it is also facing a sharp increase in displacement trends due to the escalation_\n_of internal conflict. It is estimated that 2.5 million registered Afghan refugees remain in neighboring_\n_countries, with a possibly equal number of undocumented migrants with similar protection needs in_\n_Iran and Pakistan_ _[1]_ _. Internal displacement is no less of a problem, with an estimated 1.2 million IDPs\u2019_\n_population potentially in need of humanitarian assistance._\n\n\n_Despite the continuous deterioration of the security situation within Afghanistan, a shrinking asylum_\n_space within the international community and changes in the geopolitical equilibrium at the regional_\n_level have recently spurred the return (mostly involuntary) of thousands of refugees and asylum from_\n_Pakistan and, in lower numbers, from Iran and Europe. As of September 7th, returns from Pakistan_\n_alone account for 98,000 registered and 135,000 undocumented Afghans; additional 400,000 are_\n_expected to return by the end of the year joining the growing stock of IDPs._\n\n\n_The need for managing and protecting displaced populations is taking place in a country lacking a_\n_system of safety nets and suffering from a severe economic crisis that has pushed at least 1.3 million_\n_additional Afghans into poverty, and triggered a three-fold increase in unemployment between 2012_\n_and 2014. Can Afghanistan manage the ongoing displacement challenge? Can the country absorb and_\n_successfully reintegrate displaced populations under the current security and economic circumstances?_\n_What priorities should the government and the international community address?_\n\n\n_To answer these questions it is necessary to assess Afghanistan\u2019s past experience with conflict and_\n_displacement, as well as the main structural challenges that shape the country\u2019s future._\n\n## **LEARNING FROM THE PAST**\n\n\n\n**Afghanistan has a long history of protracted international displacement.** Afghans\nfled by the millions\u2014mostly towards Iran and Pakistan\u2014in the aftermath of the Soviet\ninvasion of 1979; some returned to Afghanistan in the early 1990s following tightening\nof asylum conditions in receiving countries, while Afghanistan\u2019s civil war and the\nadvent of the Taliban reignited a new exodus to neighboring countries. The toppling\nof the Taliban regime in 2001 marked the beginning of a massive wave of returning\nAfghans. Between 2001 and 2015, UNHCR assisted the return of 4.8 million Afghans,\nand many more returned without official assistance. An estimated 20 percent of the\ntotal population currently residing in Afghanistan is made up of returnees.\n\n\n### Afghanistan has a long history of displacement.\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Returns were concentrated in time and space,** thus posing a disproportionately large challenge to\nthe absorption capacity of some districts and provinces (Figure 1 and 2) [2] . While the local impact of a\nmassive influx of refugees, and the capacity to reintegrate, depends on a range of factors [3], one thing is\nclear: **local absorption capacity certainly has a limit.** Once the limit\u2014which could vary by time and area\ndepending on local circumstances\u2014is reached, competition over resources could trigger or reinforce\n\n\n### Local absorption capacity has a limit.\n\n\n\npre-existing causes of conflict, especially since institutions are weak. In 2007, districts\nthat had received the largest influx of returnees relative to the local population were\nmore likely to suffer higher insecurity (Figure 3) [4] . Over time, intensification of conflict\nand saturation of local absorption capacity have also determined the **progressive**\n**increase in secondary displacement among returnees.** Tellingly, the incidence of\ninternal displacement among the returnees who came back in 2013 is twice as high\ncompared to those who returned in 2002, despite the fact that returnees in 2002\nwere almost 50 times more than in 2013 (Figure 4).\n\n\n\n**Figure 3** **\u0007Incidence of returns and severity of**\n\n**conflict at the district level, 2007**\n\n\n\n**Figure 4** **\u0007Share of secondary displacement,**\n\n**by year of return**\n\n\n\n30\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n0\n\n\n\nLow Medium\n\n\n\n2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013\n\n\n\nMedium Medium\n\n\n\nHigh\n\n\n\nHigh\n\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n0\n\n\n\nLow\n\n\n\nYEAR OF RETURN\nCONFLICT SEVERITY\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on UNHCR and SIOCC-UNDSS data\n\n\n2\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Returns",
-          "confidence": 0.7257170081138611,
-          "start": 12,
-          "end": 13
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
-          "confidence": 0.7930294275283813,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 8
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2007",
-          "confidence": 0.8623246550559998,
-          "start": 139,
-          "end": 140
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "returnees",
-          "confidence": 0.7943277955055237,
-          "start": 149,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.556352972984314,
-          "start": 339,
-          "end": 340
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.5363711714744568,
-          "start": 315,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.7894460558891296,
-          "start": 351,
-          "end": 352
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.549712598323822,
-          "start": 315,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nThe increase in secondary displacement among returnees is a strong sign that the country\u2019s capacity\nto absorb and reintegrate additional inflows of returnees was already overstretched before the\nsurge of recent months\u2019 returns. While no data are currently available on the incidence of secondary\ndisplacement among post-2013 returns, there is no reason to believe trends will be reversed: **a higher**\n**number of returns from abroad will likely result in an increase of internal displacement.** In particular,\nthe continued deterioration of the security situation and the economic crisis in Afghanistan are likely\nto further challenge the reintegration of more recent returns. Moreover, the increased competition for\nhumanitarian assistance at the global level, together with a shrinking space for asylum internationally\nare likely to further complicate the management of Afghanistan\u2019s current displacement crisis.\n\n## **RECOGNIZING STRUCTURAL AND PRESENT** **CHALLENGES**\n\n\n\nAfghanistan\u2019s capacity to manage displacement has to be appraised in relation to\nthe country\u2019s structural and present challenges.\n\n\n**Fragility and conflict** are Afghanistan\u2019s first structural challenge. If peace and\nstability are pre-requisite for development to take place, Afghanistan is (still)\nmissing both. According to the Global Peace Index, in 2016 the country ranks the\nfourth less peaceful after Syria, South Sudan and Iraq. Moreover, decades of conflict\nhave had a destabilizing effect on the social cohesion of the country, exacerbating\nethnic divisions and weakening government institutions and rule of law. Similarly,\ndecades of conflict have depleted Afghanistan\u2019s physical and human capital which,\ndespite the progress achieved since 2001, will constrain its growth prospects for\ndecades to come.\n\n\n### A higher number of returns from abroad will likely result in an increase of internal displacement.\n\n\n\nSecond among its structural challenges is **Afghanistan\u2019s demographic profile.** With a total fertility rate\nof about 5.3 children per woman in 2014, [5] and a population growth rate of approximately 3 percent per\nyear between 2010 and 2015, Afghanistan has the youngest population in South Asia: **48 percent of**\n**Afghans are below the age of 15.** Equally, Afghanistan has the highest youth bulge [6] of any country in\nthe region, and the third highest youth bulge worldwide after Uganda and Chad: **more than one fifth**\n**of the adult population in Afghanistan is aged between 15 and 24.** A young and growing population\ncan be both a challenge and an opportunity, depending on a country\u2019s ability to invest in human capital\nand productively employ its growing labor force.\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n|re 5 Youth Dependency ratio and youth bulge in Central and South Asian Countries n (0\u201315)/(Total Pop.)  n (15\u201324)/(15+) 47.5|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|Col12|Col13|Col14|Col15|Col16|Col17|Col18|Col19|Col20|Col21|Col22|Col23|Col24|Col25|Col26|Col27|Col28|Col29|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|47.5<br>|\n|47.5<br>|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||37.8<br>35.0<br>30.6<br>34.8<br>31.0 32.7 31.1<br>31.4<br>26.7<br>29.4 27.6 28.8<br><br>28.5<br>26.4 28.226.5 27.5 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7|||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||25.9||||||<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|\n|||||||||||||||25.9||||||<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|<br>20.4<br>24.6<br>23.6<br>20.0<br>20.8|||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n\n\nAfghanistan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan India Turkmenistan Bhutan Sri Lanka\nPakistan Nepal Bangladesh Uzbekistan Maldives Kazakhstan Iran\n\n\nSources: ALCS 2013\u201314 and UNDESA (2015)\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Global Peace Index",
-          "confidence": 0.9965128302574158,
-          "start": 239,
-          "end": 242
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.9545104503631592,
-          "start": 156,
-          "end": 157
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2016",
-          "confidence": 0.778923511505127,
-          "start": 244,
-          "end": 245
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2016",
-          "confidence": 0.977360188961029,
-          "start": 244,
-          "end": 245
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Youth Dependency ratio",
-          "confidence": 0.8154852986335754,
-          "start": 520,
-          "end": 523
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Central and South Asian Countries",
-          "confidence": 0.9464062452316284,
-          "start": 527,
-          "end": 532
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "adult population",
-          "confidence": 0.5674074292182922,
-          "start": 464,
-          "end": 466
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.8603557348251343,
-          "start": 4415,
-          "end": 4416
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNDESA",
-          "confidence": 0.6498435139656067,
-          "start": 4420,
-          "end": 4421
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.8039511442184448,
-          "start": 4422,
-          "end": 4423
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.9488633871078491,
-          "start": 4416,
-          "end": 4419
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nIn the case of Afghanistan, a young and growing population poses tremendous challenges to its public\nfinances, already stretched by limited revenues potential and massive security spending needs. Fiscal\nanalysis shows that, with the current population growth, Afghanistan will need to increase human\ncapital investments by 12 percent every year just to maintain current (inadequate) education outcomes.\nSimilarly, a growing labor force requires the labor market to absorb approximately 400 thousands\nnew entrants per year. Labor demand strong enough to be able to accommodate this many workers\nrequires sustained economic growth, which, at the moment, is beyond the country\u2019s capacity given its\nfragility and security constraints [7] .\n\n\n### Afghanistan is currently facing a deteriorating conflict and a severe economic crisis.\n\n\n\n**Afghanistan is currently facing a deteriorating conflict and a severe economic**\n**crisis** which further limits the fiscal space for development spending and targeted\nsocial assistance. Violence increased to a post-2001 high of 18,414 incidents and\n6,791 civilian casualties in 2015, while an increasing proportion of Afghanistan\u2019s\nterritory either fell under control of the anti-government elements or is currently\naffected by conflict. Decline in international spending due to the drawdown of\ninternational military forces, together with the deterioration of the security\nsituation, led to severe contraction in growth. GDP growth rate was 1.3 percent in\n2014 and 0.8 percent in 2015 compared to an average of 9.8 percent per year from\n2003 to 2012.\n\n\n\n**Figure 6** **\u0007Evolution of conflict and real per**\n\n**capita GDP growth**\n\n\n\nn [ Incident   ] n [ Civilian casualties]\n\n**\u2014** [ GDP growth   ] [Linear (GDP growth)]\n\n\n\n**Figure 7** **\u0007Youth unemployment**\n\n\n\n\n\n1,600\n\n\n1,200\n\n\n800\n\n\n400\n\n\n200\n\n\n\n2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015\n\n\n\n20\n\n\n\n60\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n900\n\n\n800\n\n\n700\n\n\n600\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n30\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n|n Rate  \u2014 Number 56.3|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|Col10|Col11|Col12|Col13|Col14|Col15|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|\n|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|56.3|||||||\n|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|41.0|||||||\n||||||34.3|34.3|34.3|34.3||37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1|\n||||||34.3|34.3|34.3|34.3||37.1|37.1|37.1|37.1||\n||||||||||||||||\n|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|27.9<br>22.5|||26.4|26.4|26.4||26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3|26.0<br>21.3||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||\n|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>National<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Urban<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|Total<br>Male<br>Rural<br>Female|\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on UNHCR and SIOCC-UNDSS data Sources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n**A sharp increase in poverty has accompanied the slowdown in growth.** Lacking any safety net system\nable to help households manage the economic downturn, the poverty rate increased from 36 percent in\n2011\u201312 to 39 percent in 2013\u201314. Similarly, labor market indicators deteriorated markedly, with a threefold increase in the unemployment rate over the same period. In 2013\u201314, the national unemployment\nrate was 22.6 percent and youth unemployment was 28 percent, representing one-half million male\nyouth unemployed, two-thirds of which were living in poor rural areas. **High male-youth unemployment**\n**is a concern because of its potential to increase poverty and conflict.** A growing body of literature\nrecognizes the direct correlation between youth bulges, lack of socio-economic inclusion and conflict.\nAn in-depth analysis of the effects of youth bulges on a variety of conflicts between 1950 and 2000\nshows that youth bulges can cause conflict. Further, the risk of domestic armed conflict from a youth\nbulge becomes more severe when combined with economic stagnation and institutional fragility [8] .\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **BROADEN THE PERSPECTIVE**\n\n\n\n**Conflict and narrow economic opportunities are familiar to Afghans.** For decades,\nAfghans have coped with shocks from protracted conflict, insecurity, and the inherent\nuncertainty associated with agricultural livelihoods [9] . Faced with frequent shocks\nand uncertainty, Afghan households have developed a set of risk management\nstrategies and risk coping mechanisms. **Traditionally, migration is at the core of**\n**the risk management strategies adopted by Afghan households.** Approximately\ntwo in three Afghans have changed residences during their lifetimes [10] . Over the past\ndecades, millions of households have moved internationally to seek shelter from\nconflict. In the process, they established a complex network of socio-economic\nties with neighboring countries, notably within Iran and Pakistan. Whole Afghan\nhouseholds have also abandoned rural areas in favor or urban areas in search of\ngreater security, better employment opportunities, and access to services. This\nhas contributed to exponential growth of major urban centers, especially Kabul,\nAfghanistan\u2019s capital city. Young, productive men have also migrated on their own\u2014\neither within Afghanistan or internationally\u2014to diversify income sources and support\ntheir households through remittances.\n\n\nGiven the complex and intertwined set of challenges faced by the Afghan\npopulation, motives of migration are hardly univocal. **Migration is part of a**\n**broader livelihood strategy at the household level aimed at counterbalancing**\n**insecurity and the lack of local employment opportunities.** Analysis shows [11] that\nhouseholds who feel more insecure in their district of residence are more likely to\nhave economic migrants abroad; but increase in real violence actually decreases\nthe likelihood to have a single member migrate, possibly due to increased need\nfor protection, or due to the fact that the entire households decides to move.\nHouseholds with better economic outcomes are less likely to rely on economic\nmigration; on the other hand, households with higher labor market vulnerability\nor with excess labor are more likely to diversify income sources through the\nmigration of a male household member.\n\n\n### Migration is at the core of the risk management strategies adopted by Afghan households. Afghan households rely on migration to counterbalance insecurity and lack of local employment opportunities.\n\n\n\nResults of the analysis also confirm that **economic migration is a strategy more easily accessible to**\n**households who can \u201cafford its costs\u201d.** In particular, having access to migration networks\u2014which is\nlikely for returnee households or households who have directly experienced economic migration\u2014\nreduces the costs of migration and increases the probability of household members working abroad.\nSimilarly, relatively richer households are more likely to have individual migrants as they are more\nlikely to have resources to support the costs of sending migrants abroad.\n\n\nThese findings suggest that, despite overall benefits, **migration might have less positive outcomes**\n**for the poorest and most vulnerable segments of the population.** International evidence shows that\nwhile migration reduces poverty, the poor tend to migrate less or to migrate to low-return destinations\nbecause they lack opportunities or resources (monetary or human capital) to take advantage of\nbetter paying jobs [12] . Moreover, **migration outcomes are likely to differ depending on the forced**\n**versus voluntary nature of the decision to move.**\n\n\nPoverty and protection needs are widespread and largely unmet in Afghanistan. With 39 percent\nof the population unable to satisfy basic food and non-food needs (that is, are \u201cpoor\u201d), and in the\nabsence of formal safety nets to help households cope with shocks, migration is seldom the result of\nvoluntary choice. Rather, migration is primarily the result of \u201c _push factors_ \u201d related to insecurity and\nlack of socio-economic opportunities. In this context, mobile households are not the only vulnerable\nsegments of the population, and the structural factors that cause poverty in the general population\noverlap with those afflicting migrants.\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **TAKE STOCK OF THE EVIDENCE**\n### Displaced populations\n\n\nForced displacement has been a tragic consequence of past decades of conflict in Afghanistan and it is\nlikely to connote its immediate future due to deteriorating security and regional equilibrium. Assessing\nthe welfare and integration of displaced households that are currently living in Afghanistan provides\nimportant insights on the challenges that future IDPs and prospective returnees might face.\n\n\n### Household mobility\u2014 irrespective of its forced and/ or economic motives\u2014is associated with urbanization.\n\n\n\n**Household mobility\u2014irrespective of its forced and/or economic motives\u2014**\n**is associated with urbanization** (Figure 8). IDP and returnee households\npredominantly settle in urban centers, joining a throng of economic migrants\nescaping rural areas in search for jobs and better access to health and education.\nIDP and returnee households are also more likely to have a literate household\nhead compared to households who did not move and to households who have\nmoved for economic reasons, reflecting better access to education returnees\nmight have had in asylum [13] . However, **IDPs\u2014similar to non-mobile households\u2014**\n**have very limited labor market outcomes.** Heads in IDP households are in fact\nmore likely to be either engaged in vulnerable forms of employment or to\nbe unemployed and/or underemployed. Returnee households are more likely\nto have a member working abroad and sending remittances, possibly taking\nadvantage of networks established while in asylum.\n\n\n\n**Figure 8** **\u0007Urbanization rate by households\u2019**\n\n**migration status**\n\n\n\n**Figure 9** **\u0007Poverty rate by households\u2019**\n\n**migration status**\n\n\n\n45\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n\n40\n\n\n35\n\n\n30\n\n\n25\n\n\n20\n\n\n15\n\n\n\n10\n10\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\nNo Move Returnee IDP Economic No Move Returnee IDP\n\n\n\nEconomic\n\nMigrant\n\n\n\nMigrant\n\n\n\nNotes: Vertical bar indicates the 95% confidence interval\nSources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314 Sources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\nPoverty and vulnerability are widespread in Afghanistan. **Mobility\u2014irrespective of its forced and/or**\n**economic motives\u2014is associated with a lower risk of poverty** (Figure 9); returnee households have\na significantly lower poverty risk compared to non-mobile households [14] . The poverty rate among\nreturnee households is 29.4 percent compared to 40.5 percent among non-mobile households. This\nlower poverty risk, however, is entirely explained by differences in literacy and in urbanization, with\nrefugee households being more likely to have a literate household head and to live in an urban area\ncompared to non-mobile households.\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "status*",
-          "confidence": 0.6741371154785156,
-          "start": 309,
-          "end": 311
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Authors",
-          "confidence": 0.503505289554596,
-          "start": 372,
-          "end": 373
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.9099381566047668,
-          "start": 398,
-          "end": 399
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.7862109541893005,
-          "start": 378,
-          "end": 381
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.6696279644966125,
-          "start": 378,
-          "end": 381
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "returnee households",
-          "confidence": 0.8406595587730408,
-          "start": 433,
-          "end": 435
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.7248950004577637,
-          "start": 377,
-          "end": 378
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Authors",
-          "confidence": 0.6363537311553955,
-          "start": 372,
-          "end": 373
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.6796689629554749,
-          "start": 398,
-          "end": 399
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.6618226170539856,
-          "start": 378,
-          "end": 381
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.8721612095832825,
-          "start": 378,
-          "end": 381
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "returnee households",
-          "confidence": 0.8418574929237366,
-          "start": 433,
-          "end": 435
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "poverty rate",
-          "confidence": 0.5454302430152893,
-          "start": 450,
-          "end": 452
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n\nEvidence suggests that **literacy and human capital of mobile households are the**\n**main determinants of their socio-economic inclusion.** Further, the risk of poverty\nfor mobile households\u2014irrespective of the motives for migration\u2014depends on the\nsame factors that affect the risk of poverty in the Afghan population as a whole. As\na matter of fact, nearly 70 percent of the working age population in Afghanistan\nis illiterate, with illiteracy being widespread among the poorest segments of the\npopulation. Abysmally low literacy and overall poor human capital of the adult\npopulation are impediments to poverty reduction in Afghanistan. With conflict and\ndisplacement likely to continue in the near future, the relevant policy question is:\n**how does mobility, and forced displacement in particular, affect human capital**\n**accumulation?**\n\n\n### The risk of poverty for Afghan households - irrespective of their mobility status - depends on literacy and human capital.\n\n\n\nThere is no a priori answer to this question, as the effects depend on balance\nbetween improved access to services as mobile households settle in urban areas [15]\nand the _migration\u2019s costs_ (economic, social, psychological among them) that\ndecrease investment in human capital. Available evidence from the study of former refugees residing\nin Afghanistan in 2013\u201314 shows that **mobility during the decades before the fall of the Taliban**\n**had a positive effect on returnee literacy.** Despite progress during the last decade, Afghanistan\u2019s\neducation supply and quality lag\u2014that of neighboring countries. As a result, Afghans who were born\nabroad had better access to education than same-aged Afghans who did not move, particularly for\nolder returning Afghans.\n\n\n\n**Figure 10** **Afghans\u2019 literacy rate, by age and country of birth**\n\n~~n~~ [ Iran  ] ~~n~~ [ Pakistan  ] ~~n~~ [Afghanistan]\n\n90\n\n\n80\n\n\n70\n\n\n60\n\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n[0\u20134] [5\u201319] [10\u201314] [15\u201319] [20\u201324] [25\u201329] [30\u201334] [35\u201339] [40\u201344] [45\u201349] [50\u201354] [55\u201359] [60\u201364] [65+]\n\n\n\nSources: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n**On the other hand, internal displacement has a negative impact on children\u2019s**\n**human capital accumulation.** In particular, regression analysis shows that children\naged six to 15 in IDP households are 8.5 percent less likely to be enrolled in school,\nand that such disadvantage is particularly severe for the first two years of residence\nin a new destination [16] . Such result is in line with findings of previous analysis [17]\nshowing that poorest and most vulnerable households in Afghanistan are more likely\nto adopt harmful coping strategies, such as selling their productive assets or taking\nchildren out of school, when hit by a shock. In this sense, displaced households\nmight be more vulnerable to the risk of engaging in harmful coping strategies in\nthe years immediately following displacement while adjusting their livelihoods to\nthe new destination.\n\n\n### Internal displacement has a negative impact on children\u2019s human capital accumulation.\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "study of former refugees residing\nin Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.579574465751648,
-          "start": 246,
-          "end": 253
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.9992380142211914,
-          "start": 252,
-          "end": 253
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.9981923699378967,
-          "start": 254,
-          "end": 257
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "former refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.7308467030525208,
-          "start": 248,
-          "end": 250
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.9657414555549622,
-          "start": 465,
-          "end": 466
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.8501251935958862,
-          "start": 567,
-          "end": 568
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.941964864730835,
-          "start": 466,
-          "end": 469
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "IDP households",
-          "confidence": 0.754716157913208,
-          "start": 509,
-          "end": 511
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n### Individual economic migration\n\n\nThere is a paucity of data to study the importance of individual economic migration as a livelihood\nstrategy [18] . In line with anecdotal evidence and prevailing cultural norms, **economic migration is an**\n**exclusively male, and mostly youth, phenomenon.** The incidence of economic migration has varied\nover time, in line with the overall performance of the Afghan economy and its labor market (Figure 11).\nInterestingly, while migration has been increasing in recent years, the number of economic migrants in\n2013\u201314 was 40 percent less than that in 2007\u201308. This may be due to increased difficulty in accessing\nresources for leaving the country, or due to deterioration of economic opportunities in Iran [19], which\nnevertheless remains the most likely destination for Afghans seeking work abroad (Figure 12).\n\n\n\n**Figure 11** **\u0007Trends in individual economic**\n\n**migration**\n\n\nn [ # Migrant workers TOTAL ]\nn [ # Migrant workers ABROAD    ]\n~~n~~ [ Unemployment rate, male [25\u201350]]\n\n\n250,000\n\n15\n\n200,000\n\n\n\n**Figure 12** **\u0007Destination of migrant workers,**\n\n**by survey year**\n\n\n\nn [ Afghanistan   ] n [ Pakistan   ] n [ Iran]\n\nn [ Arabian Peninsula   ] n [ Other]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n100\n\n\n90\n\n\n80\n\n\n70\n\n\n60\n\n\n50\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n\n150,000\n\n\n100,000\n\n\n50,000\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n2007\u201308 2011\u201312 2013\u201314 2007 2011 2013\n\n\n\n10\n\n\n5\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314, ALCS 2011\u201312 and\nNRVA 2007\u201308\n\n\n\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314, ALCS 2011\u201312 and\nNRVA 2007\u201308\n\n\n\nThe number of migrants choosing to migrate to \u201cOther\u201d farther away destinations (mainly Europe\nand Australia) is much higher in 2013 than it was in 2007, increasing from ten to almost 19 thousand,\nreflecting the deteriorating economic and political environment in neighboring countries and\npossibly the availability of new migration routes spurred by the Syrian refugee crisis. **Afghans**\n**choosing to seek employment opportunities abroad come predominantly from rural areas,** a\ntendency that has been strengthening along with deterioration of economic and security conditions\noutside urban centers.\n\n\n### Economic migration is a male-youth phenomenon.\n\n8\n\n\n\n**The education profile of migrants reflects the predominance of \u201cpush factors\u201d**\n**in migration choices, with no evidence of positive self-selection** [20] . In particular,\nusing the male population aged 15\u201335 as a reference, migrants have less education\nwhether they come from rural or urban areas. Such findings could also suggest\nthat migration options and networks are more broadly available for low-skilled\noccupations [21], particularly in neighboring Iran and Gulf Countries. **Migrants choosing**\n**farther destinations are more likely to be educated.** Sorting into destinations based\non migrants\u2019 education is likely to reflect higher costs associated with the journey\n(transport, smugglers, time\u2026) as well as the skills and connections necessary to obtain\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.6738075613975525,
-          "start": 318,
-          "end": 319
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.5412333607673645,
-          "start": 250,
-          "end": 251
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Authors",
-          "confidence": 0.6409329175949097,
-          "start": 313,
-          "end": 314
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.5859713554382324,
-          "start": 256,
-          "end": 257
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.5033194422721863,
-          "start": 301,
-          "end": 304
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2011\u201312",
-          "confidence": 0.5664069652557373,
-          "start": 298,
-          "end": 301
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "workers TOTAL",
-          "confidence": 0.8326883316040039,
-          "start": 198,
-          "end": 200
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.5685502290725708,
-          "start": 323,
-          "end": 324
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Authors",
-          "confidence": 0.6042183637619019,
-          "start": 313,
-          "end": 314
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2007\u201308",
-          "confidence": 0.5664543509483337,
-          "start": 295,
-          "end": 298
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "workers TOTAL",
-          "confidence": 0.8400651216506958,
-          "start": 198,
-          "end": 200
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nthe information needed to complete the journey and settle/find employment once the destination is\nreached. In 2007\u201308, 44 percent of migrants choosing destinations other than Iran, Pakistan, or the\nArabian Peninsula had secondary or tertiary education. Such results are in line with data collected in the\nrecent _Joint IDP Profiling Services_ initiative, according to which male Afghans arriving in Greece in early\n2016 were mostly single youth possessing higher education.\n\n\n\n**Table 1** **\u0007Monthly labor income in Afghanistan**\n\n**and remittances from abroad**\n\n\n**MEAN** **MEDIAN**\n\n\n**Agriculture** 5930 4800\n\n\n**Manufacturing** 7496 7000\n\n\n**Construction** 6516 5600\n\n\n**Services** 9927 8000\n\n\n**Public sector** 14368 12000\n\n\n**Health and Education** 9402 7000\n\n\n**Remittances** 8581 5833\n\n\n**Total (excl. remittances)** **8529** **7000**\n\n\nNotes: labor income has been computed for male workers aged [14,35]\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n\n**Figure 13** **\u0007Distribution of remittances,**\n\n**by sending country**\n\n\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nPakistan\n\n\nIran\n\n\nUAE\n\n\nOther Gulf\n\n\nEurope\n\n\nAustralia\n\n\nOther\n\n\n0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000\n\nMONTHLY REMITTANCES, AFS\n\n\nNote: The figure shows a box and whiskers plot. The box ranges from\nthe 25th percentile to the 75th percentile. The line in the middle of the\nbox shows the median. The two lines on either side of the box extend to\nminimum and maximum values, excluding outliers. The dots indicate outliers.\nSource: Authors\u2019 calculation based on ALCS 2013\u201314\n\n\n\nThe importance of individual economic migration in Afghan households\u2019 livelihood\nstrategy is confirmed by data on remittances. **The vast majority of economic**\n**migrants send remittances.** In 2013\u201314, 80 percent of Afghans who left the\nhousehold seeking employment opportunities abroad had sent remittances,\ncontributing on average about 70 percent of total labor income to their household.\nSuch numbers are striking, especially when considering that the information on\nremittances is collected on household members who left just during the year\npreceding the survey. This implies that over a very short period of time the vast\nmajority of migrants were able to find employment and contribute to the welfare\nof their households in Afghanistan. **Remittances\u2019 amounts vary by destination**\n**country,** reflecting differences in the education profile of migrants and in local\nwages. On average, remittances are approximately 8600 Afs per month, in line with\nthe average monthly income of a male worker below the age of 35 in Afghanistan.\nHowever, the median value of remittances is 20 percent lower, confirming the\nprevalence of low-skilled workers among migrants.\n\n\n### The vast majority of economic migrants send remittances. Remittances\u2019 amounts vary by destination country.\n\n9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.8961203098297119,
-          "start": 221,
-          "end": 222
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "\u2019",
-          "confidence": 0.7102039456367493,
-          "start": 216,
-          "end": 217
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.7937172055244446,
-          "start": 246,
-          "end": 247
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "\u201314\n\n\n\n*",
-          "confidence": 0.8743844032287598,
-          "start": 222,
-          "end": 225
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "\u201314\n\n\n\n*",
-          "confidence": 0.6906347870826721,
-          "start": 222,
-          "end": 225
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "workers aged",
-          "confidence": 0.6776162981987,
-          "start": 206,
-          "end": 208
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.6564828753471375,
-          "start": 338,
-          "end": 339
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Authors",
-          "confidence": 0.787973165512085,
-          "start": 333,
-          "end": 334
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.9919359683990479,
-          "start": 470,
-          "end": 471
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.9387698769569397,
-          "start": 339,
-          "end": 342
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.882445752620697,
-          "start": 339,
-          "end": 342
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Afghan households",
-          "confidence": 0.6156575679779053,
-          "start": 349,
-          "end": 351
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n## **MAIN MESSAGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\nAfghanistan is facing a severe security and economic crisis. This crisis is taking place in a context\nalready complicated by an explosive mix of population growth, excess labor supply, widespread\npoverty, poor governance and lack of government capacity and financial resources to respond to\nthe needs of its citizens. While Afghans have traditionally relied on migration to navigate times of\ndistress, their options are shrinking at a time when needed the most; Iran is slowly recovering from\nan economic crisis, Pakistan is imposing strict border controls, and Europe is struggling with a\npolitical backlash resulting from the large mixed-migratory flows from Syria, Afghanistan and SubSaharan Africa.\n\n\nThe available evidence suggests that \u201cpush factors\u201d are the primary motivators for migration both\nwithin and outside Afghanistan. While migrants might choose where to go depending on available\nopportunities, leaving is more of a necessity, rather than a choice. With rampant unemployment and\nescalating conflict, security and economic motives are two sides of the same coin. Can these flows\nbe contained or reversed? The past history of displacement and returns to Afghanistan indicates the\npotential destabilizing effects of increasing population pressure on limited local resources. Given the\nincrease in secondary displacement among more recent waves of returnees, local absorption capacity\nappears already overtaxed. Additional returns from Pakistan, Iran, or Europe are likely to result in\nfurther secondary displacement, unemployment, and instability. _In such context, the_ _**international**_\n_**community should increase its advocacy to ensure voluntary, safe, dignified, and phased returns**_\n_as further population shocks could undermine civilian and military aid efforts and further escalate_\n_conflict. Peace and stability in Afghanistan are not only a pre-requisite for its development but also_\n_a global public good. If no country or institution alone has the capacity to help Afghanistan manage_\n_its displacement issues,_ _**the international community as a whole should mobilize resources to assist**_\n_**those countries such as Pakistan and Iran who have shared the burden for decades, conditioned**_\n_**on continued willingness to host refugee populations.**_ _Similarly, the international community as a_\n_whole should support the development of_ _**legal channels for temporary economic migration and**_\n_**more effective management of asylum requests**_ _which could help Afghanistan overcome its current_\n_crisis and ease its structural challenges._\n\n\nSecond, evidence suggests that factors affecting poverty risks among mobile households are the\nsame as the one observed in the general population. As Afghanistan\u2019s context is characterized by\nwidespread poverty and the degree of destitution among mobile households is not dissimilar from\nthe rest of the population, _**targeting needs should be preferred to targeting categories,**_ _not to_\n_create perceptions of unequal treatment that may exacerbate social fragmentation._ Such approach\nmight be particularly important as the government and international community move towards\na developmental approach in the management of displacement issues. As the fiscal space for\nsocial spending shrinks, _**consolidation of interventions should contribute to the development of a**_\n_**nationwide safety net system**_ aimed at helping household cope with risk and, possibly, at reducing\nsome of the causes of displacement.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\nThird, _**particular attention should be devoted to minimizing any possible negative impact of**_\n_**displacement on human capital investments for future generations.**_ Evidence suggests that the\nlack human capital is the main determinants of the risk of poverty and that households are likely\nto respond to negative shocks by pulling children out of school. While a comprehensive safety net\nsystem could help mitigating such negative consequences, bureaucratic barriers such as residency\nstatus and transferability of school records could negatively impact displaced or, more generally,\nmobile populations. Moreover, given the prevalence of mobility and displacement in Afghanistan,\ngreater focus should be devoted to investing in functional literacy and skill-development programs\nthat display greater portability and provide displaced individuals with greater access to economic\nopportunities, wherever they end up being.\n\n\nLastly, evidence suggests that migrants will likely continue to converge towards Afghanistan\u2019s urban\ncenters as they seek better security, jobs, and services. _Urbanization trends require immediate_\n_intervention by local authorities to increase shelter capacity and access to services. National and_\n_provincial authorities should further recognize that, in the medium and long term,_ _**local integration in**_\n_**urban and semi-urban areas is inevitable and it requires adequate planning**_ _to maximize the returns_\n_from urban agglomeration, for example by investing in connectivity and accessibility, while ensuring_\n_access to basic services and a minimum standard of living._\n\n## **ENDNOTES**\n\n\n1. UN Population Movement Bulletin, Issue 5, 7 Sept, 2016.\n\n\n2. Based on UNHCR assisted returns data, 78 percent of returns occurred between 2002 and 2006. Districts with\n\u201chigh\u201d intensity of returns in 2007 had an average share of returnees over the population of 70 percent.\n\n\n3. Returnee households are considered to have \u201creintegrated\u201d successfully if they were able to return to the place\nwhere they used to live before displacement, and if they were able to achieve\u2014on average\u2014socio-economic\noutcomes and legal protection in line with those of the local/host population. Household ability to reintegrate\nsuccessfully might depend on several factors related to the social, economic and institutional conditions prevailing\nin the host community, as well as on the physical, human and social capital accumulated by returnee households\nwhile in asylum, and on their returns \u201con arrival\u201d.\n\n\n4. According to NRVA 2007\u201308 data, approximately 85 percent of Afghan households reported to have been\nnegatively affected by a \u201clarge influx of returnees\u201d during the 12 months preceding the survey.\n\n\n5. Demographic and Health Survey (2014).\n\n\n6. The youth bulge is defined as the share of youth aged 15\u201324 to the adult population aged 15+.\n\n\n7. Growth is expected to remain slow over coming years, reflecting weak demand, increasing output gap and the\nlack of fiscal space for increasing social transfers in order to boost short-term economic growth (World Bank,\n2016; _Navigating Risk and Uncertainty in Afghanistan_ ).\n\n\n8. Urdal, Henrik. 2004. _The devil in the demographics: The effect of youth bulges on domestic armed conflict,_\n1950\u20132000. Social Development Papers: Conflict and Reconstruction Paper 14.\n\n\n9. Low-technology, rain-fed agriculture remains the country\u2019s primary sector of employment, especially for its\npoorest and more vulnerable people.\n\n\n10. ALCS 2013\u201314.\n\n\n11. Probability of having a household member abroad was estimated using a Linear Probability model and ALCS\n2013\u201314 data. Controls include a dummy indicating whether the household feels insecure in the district of\nresidence; the number of security incidents per thousand inhabitants in the district of residence; composition and\nemployment outcomes at the household level; dummy variables identifying returnee households, IDP households\nand households migrating for economic reasons; a dummy indicating urban residence and quintiles of a wealth\nindex to proxy for household welfare.\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR assisted returns data",
-          "confidence": 0.9968850016593933,
-          "start": 305,
-          "end": 309
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6330993175506592,
-          "start": 305,
-          "end": 306
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Returnee households",
-          "confidence": 0.9711676239967346,
-          "start": 345,
-          "end": 347
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "NRVA 2007\u201308 data",
-          "confidence": 0.6182636022567749,
-          "start": 456,
-          "end": 461
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "NRVA",
-          "confidence": 0.6275922060012817,
-          "start": 456,
-          "end": 457
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2007\u201308",
-          "confidence": 0.8600698709487915,
-          "start": 457,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Afghan households",
-          "confidence": 0.9013358354568481,
-          "start": 466,
-          "end": 468
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Demographic and Health Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9119037389755249,
-          "start": 492,
-          "end": 496
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.6606869697570801,
-          "start": 488,
-          "end": 489
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.8464213013648987,
-          "start": 497,
-          "end": 498
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Afghan households",
-          "confidence": 0.6707085371017456,
-          "start": 466,
-          "end": 468
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.5324335098266602,
-          "start": 640,
-          "end": 641
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "district of\nresidence",
-          "confidence": 0.8293467164039612,
-          "start": 680,
-          "end": 683
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.8630182147026062,
-          "start": 641,
-          "end": 644
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.8996961116790771,
-          "start": 641,
-          "end": 644
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "returnee households",
-          "confidence": 0.6634578108787537,
-          "start": 710,
-          "end": 712
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**FRAGILITY AND POPULATION MOVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN**\n\n\n12. The World Bank, 2011. _Migration and poverty. Towards better opportunities for the poor._\n\nWashington DC.\n\n\n13. The share of literate household heads in IDP households decreases to 43 percent when excluding secondary\n\ndisplacement, i.e. returnees who have been internally displaced upon return and that were IDPs at the time of the\nsurvey.\n\n\n14. Due to a relatively small sample size, the poverty rates of IDP and economic migrant households are estimated\n\nwith lower precision, and therefore the difference in poverty rate compared to non-mobile households is not\nstatistically significant.\n\n\n15. Afghanistan is characterized by sizeable differences in access to education between rural (low) and urban areas\n\n(high). As detailed in the 2015 _Poverty Status Update_ report, urban/rural differences account for approximately\none-third of differences in education opportunities for Afghan children.\n\n\n16. Probability of being in school was estimated using a Probit model and ALCS 2013\u201314 data. Controls include sex\n\nand age of the child; composition and employment outcomes at the household level; dummy variables identifying\nreturnee households and IDP households; whether the household has migrants and receives remittances; quintiles\nof a wealth index; urban residence and quintiles of an index indicating the severity of conflict in the district of\nresidence.\n\n\n17. Ministry of Economy, World Bank (2015): _Afghanistan Poverty Status_ Update.\n\n\n18. Some useful information can be obtained from the three available and comparable rounds of the Afghanistan\n\nLiving Conditions Survey (ALCS) conducted in 2013\u201314, 2011\u201312 and 2007\u201308 which collect information about\nhousehold members who have left the household in the 12 months preceding the survey and about their reason\nfor migrating.\n\n\n19. The collapse in oil prices had a strong impact on Iran\u2019s economy, further magnified by international sanctions\n\nimposed in 2011. Limited employment opportunities, a weaker exchange rate, and progressive reduction in\nuniversal subsidies (notably electricity) might have affected the returns of economic migrants choosing Iran as a\ndestination, and possibly the choice of trying to reach Europe.\n\n\n20. Unfortunately, information on the education and employment outcomes of individual migrants was only collected\n\nin 2007\u201308, so it is not possible to assess any changes in migrants\u2019 profiles.\n\n\n21. In 2007\u201308, migrants abroad were mostly employed as day laborers (82 percent) and salaried employees in the\n\nprivate sector (12 percent).\n\n\n12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.509604811668396,
-          "start": 74,
-          "end": 75
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.6235514879226685,
-          "start": 74,
-          "end": 75
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
-          "confidence": 0.9808158278465271,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 8
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.9103357195854187,
-          "start": 145,
-          "end": 146
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "IDP households",
-          "confidence": 0.7808371782302856,
-          "start": 42,
-          "end": 44
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2015 _Poverty Status Update_ report",
-          "confidence": 0.5051984786987305,
-          "start": 145,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "report",
-          "confidence": 0.5116549730300903,
-          "start": 149,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "AFGHANISTAN",
-          "confidence": 0.8481816649436951,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 8
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.8890922665596008,
-          "start": 145,
-          "end": 146
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.7959499955177307,
-          "start": 183,
-          "end": 186
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ALCS 2013\u201314 data",
-          "confidence": 0.578078031539917,
-          "start": 182,
-          "end": 187
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.8061382174491882,
-          "start": 285,
-          "end": 286
-        },
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.5900102257728577,
-          "start": 182,
-          "end": 183
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.8773321509361267,
-          "start": 282,
-          "end": 283
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.6400142312049866,
-          "start": 183,
-          "end": 186
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.9718841314315796,
-          "start": 183,
-          "end": 186
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "returnee households",
-          "confidence": 0.6744822263717651,
-          "start": 209,
-          "end": 211
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan\n\nLiving Conditions Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9376978278160095,
-          "start": 282,
-          "end": 286
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.8660212159156799,
-          "start": 285,
-          "end": 286
-        },
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "ALCS",
-          "confidence": 0.6013534069061279,
-          "start": 182,
-          "end": 183
-        },
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Ministry of Economy, World Bank",
-          "confidence": 0.5048984289169312,
-          "start": 250,
-          "end": 256
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Afghanistan",
-          "confidence": 0.9671674370765686,
-          "start": 282,
-          "end": 283
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013\u201314",
-          "confidence": 0.8396807312965393,
-          "start": 183,
-          "end": 186
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "household members",
-          "confidence": 0.6598542332649231,
-          "start": 306,
-          "end": 308
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/64f35fee-a97c-32da-bd8d-46c676fc52a2/108733-REVISED-PUBLIC-WB-UNHCR-policy-brief-FINAL.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_111/raw/doc_111_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,235 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Executive Summary\n\nThis report summarizes the key findings of the focus group discussion conducted with 145\nrefugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo who fled violence in the Kasa\u00ef region to Lunda\nNorte, Angola, on their relocation from temporary reception centres to a new site. The discussions\nrevealed a general agreement by the refugees to the principles and organization of the relocation,\nbut also hesitations to relocate from a relatively urban area to a rural setting, mainly due to\nnegative rumours and concerns related to livelihood opportunities and freedom of movement. As a\nby-product, the consultations gave valuable insight to the underlying fears, wishes and hopes of\nthe refugees with regards to the L\u00f3vua site, giving impetus to adjust the related plans and\ncommunication strategy accordingly.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA.\n\n##### Introduction\n\n\nBetween April and 8 July 2017, violence and ethnic tensions in the Kasai Province of the\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) generated an influx of over 29,000 Congolese\nseeking asylum in Angola\u2019s Lunda Norte province. [1] The refugees are hosted in two\ntemporary reception centres, Cacanda and Mussungue, which are operating beyond their\nmaximum capacity in conditions that do not allow for adequate protection and assistance.\nSome 62% of the refugees live with the host community. [2] The Government of Angola\nallocated an extensive rural site to accommodate the refugees in mid-and longer term,\napproximately 90 km from Dundo and the reception centres, which are situated in the\nvicinity of the Dundo town that has a population of some 30,000 people. The new site in\nL\u00f3vua is under development.\n\n\nUNHCR undertook a series of the focus group discussions (FGDs) with refugees living in\nthe reception centres on the relocation of the refugee population to L\u00f3vua. The FGDs were\ncoordinated by UNHCR and conducted with the support of Ministry for Assistance and\nSocial Reinsertion (MINARS), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS), UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP.\n\n##### Objective\n\n\nFocus group discussions (FDG) were undertaken to consult the refugee community in the\nreception centres on (1) the guiding principles and logistics of the relocation plan; (2) the\nshelter package foreseen for refugees to build family shelters, latrine and shower on their\nallocated plot; and (3) to identify possible community-based support mechanisms in the\nframework of the relocation process.\n\n\nThe refugee population is comprised of some 75% of women and children and 6% of\npersons with specific needs, including over 200 unaccompanied and separated children\nand several hundred single-headed households (mainly female headed). Elderly represent\nsome 1,5% of the population. It was seen important to incorporate persons of all these\ncategories into the consultations.\n\n##### Methodology\n\n\nFifteen focus group discussions (FDG) were conducted with 145 refugees to explore their\nviews, including ten FGDs held in Mussungue reception centre on 23-24 June 2017 and\nfive FDGs in Cacanda reception centre on 8 July 2017. The FGDs were held separately for\nfemale and male refugees in three distinct population groups: adolescents (13-17 years\nold), adults (18-59 years old) and elderly (60+) to obtain information of each category\u2019s\nspecific needs.\n\n\nTaking into consideration the ethnic tensions within the refugee population, mitigation\nagainst participants being uncomfortable with expressing their thoughts freely was\nrequired. To this effect, generally two participants of each category were identified and\nrequested to bring their friends within the set FGD requirements. Stock taking was\nundertaken after each FDG to ensure persons with specific needs were included.\n\n\n_1_ Biometric Registration Update as of 8 July 2017 available at : https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/58456\n_2 Ibid._\n\n\n2 UNHCR / 19, July, 2017\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "focus group discussions",
-          "confidence": 0.8900279998779297,
-          "start": 388,
-          "end": 391
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "FDG",
-          "confidence": 0.8666813373565674,
-          "start": 392,
-          "end": 393
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Mussungue reception centre",
-          "confidence": 0.8333526849746704,
-          "start": 409,
-          "end": 412
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.559421956539154,
-          "start": 415,
-          "end": 416
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8604395985603333,
-          "start": 398,
-          "end": 399
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Biometric Registration Update",
-          "confidence": 0.9649667143821716,
-          "start": 539,
-          "end": 542
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8344210386276245,
-          "start": 556,
-          "end": 557
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.9587880373001099,
-          "start": 546,
-          "end": 547
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee population",
-          "confidence": 0.5130304098129272,
-          "start": 482,
-          "end": 484
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA\n\n\n_Breakdown by sex and age group of focus group discussion participants._\n\n##### Key findings\n\n\nThe main findings from data generated by the focus group discussions are summarized\nbelow. The consultation brought about valuable information also in terms of current\nprotection challenges and daily concerns of the refugee population living in the reception\ncentres.\n\n\nIn terms of **site plan and principles of relocation,** essentially positive feedback was\nreceived on the concept of a village-based settlement (vs. a traditional camp design), the\nsize of the family plots, as well as on moving refugees by date of arrival, thereby ensuring\nto a large extent the proximity of families who lived in the same villages in the DRC.\nHowever, **family unity** needs to be safeguarded even if family members didn\u2019t arrive to\nLunda Norte at the same time. This is being ensured through continuous registration before\nthe beginning of the relocation and on case-by-case basis after the relocation.\nNevertheless meticulous execution of the physical relocation is also required to ensure\nfamily separation does not occur during the process.\n\n\nSimilarly, refugees accepted the existence of communal facilities upon arrival to the\nvillages where their assigned plot is situated until the have completed the construction of\ntheir private facilities. They also largely agreed that they would need to rely on themselves\nto construct their private shelter, latrine and shower facilities on the plot allocated to them.\nAssistance with the construction of these facilities was requested and is foreseen for those\nwho are physically impaired, need technical advice, or have simultaneous time-intensive\nduties or special needs (e.g. elderly persons and single-headed households). The\ndiscussions indicated that refugees would not be able to count on free assistance from the\ncommunity members for construction purposes. Many expressed contentment with having\nland to cultivate to diversify their diet and for livelihoods purposes.\n\n\nOverall the refugees agreed with the tools and materials proposed in the **shelter and**\n**WASH kit** with some concerns raised vis-\u00e0-vis the durability of the shelter materials, mainly\nthe plastic tarpaulins (UNHCR CRI plastic sheet). Especially a tin roof for the shelter was\nstrongly recommended. The refugees however accepted that the kit proposed was a\nstandard emergency shelter response, while more durable locally used materials\n(transitional shelter) are foreseen as the situation stabilizes. Groups of elderly men also\n\n\nUNHCR / 19, July, 2017 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.995762050151825,
-          "start": 0,
-          "end": 4
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.7621472477912903,
-          "start": 3,
-          "end": 4
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA",
-          "confidence": 0.6975529193878174,
-          "start": 10,
-          "end": 14
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "CONGOLESE REFUGEES",
-          "confidence": 0.8252645134925842,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA.\n\n\nsuggested to add an axe and some other tools to the kit, such as watering can, plough and\na hoe, which would allow farming and gardening from the beginning of the relocation.\n\n\nConcerns vis-\u00e0-vis relocation\n\n\nThe main concerns raised with regards to the conditions in L\u00f3vua across the discussion\ngroups include security, livelihood opportunities, freedom of movement and education.\n\n\nIn terms of **security**, the main issue raised was discrimination, tribalism and ethnic\ntensions among the refugee community (specifically between Luba and the Mpende\naccording to one FGD). The elderly especially were worried that revenge acts along the\ntribal lines would be undertaken once in L\u00f3vua, especially if possible militia members and\nwarring individuals were identified. The ethnicity of the local population (Tshokwe) who\nreportedly maintains close links with the Mpende was also eyed with suspicion, combined\nwith apprehensions that the local community would be hostile towards the relocated\nrefugee population. Similar concerns were raised in all focus groups, except for one. It was\nthereby suggested in some groups that ethnic groups should be living separately in L\u00f3vua.\nOverall, the groups were rather confident that sufficient security presence, as well as the\npresence of the humanitarian actors, would deter possible conflict, and relieved when\nhearing that the host community had expressed their readiness to welcome refugees.\n\n\nSome refugees who live with the host communities and individuals from Dundo have\nreportedly spread rumours about lions in L\u00f3vua that eat humans; and that the site does not\nhave any water. These rumours had created fears among the refugees interviewed, as well\nas the possibility of snakes. Enough material was requested to build flooring in the shelter\nto protect oneself from snakes.\n\n\nThe subject of **livelihood opportunities**, including jobs within and outside on the site, as\nwell as market availability, dominated the conversation in most FGDs independently of sex\nand age. The remoteness of L\u00f3vua from towns and cities (some 9 km from L\u00f3vua town of\n12,000 inhabitants), and employment, commercial and business opportunities -seemingly\nmore readily available in urban settings- were raised as major concerns. Refugee men\nenquired about work possibilities in site management and maintenance, while women\nenquired about possibility of cash grants/loans to start their own businesses and smallscale commercial activity. Finally, the range of available livelihood activities was a\nparticularly important point for those who were or had highly educated family members.\n\n\n**Freedom of movement** was a concern raised across the discussion groups. A part of the\nrefugee community has family links with the population of Dundo town whom they wished\nto continue visiting. Some refugees also receive financial support from them, which\ncomplements food and NFI distributions provided by the humanitarian organizations.\nWomen especially reported that domestic tasks and small-scale commercial activities in\nDundo gave them additional income. Many women also buy fresh food from Dundo market\nfor dietary reasons, and were worried that a similar market may not exist in more rural\nL\u00f3vua, or is not close enough for the elderly to access it. Some groups also enquired about\nwhether they would be permitted to return to the DRC from L\u00f3vua once the situation in the\nKasai becomes calm.\n\n\nEspecially the youth, women and some elderly were concerned about the possibilities\navailable for children and youth to continue their **education** (primary, secondary and\ntertiary), which had been disrupted by the flight to Angola. Mixed opinions were expressed\nabout whether education opportunities in French or in Portuguese would be preferable.\n\n\n4 UNHCR / 19, July, 2017\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA\n\n\nRefugees were also concerned about international organizations withdrawing their\npresence in L\u00f3vua and about the continued **provision of services**, including health,\nprotection activities, and food and NFI distribution. The presence of humanitarian\norganizations was also perceived as decreasing the likelihood of inter-ethnic violence\nerupting at the new site.\n\n\nThe availability of **electricity** was a relatively frequent question, as some of the refugees\ncome from villages and cities that have electricity. Availability of communication network\nwas important for many refugees, mainly to stay in touch with families back in the DRC and\nto ensure family members would find them in L\u00f3vua in case of need, but also for general\ninformation needs.\n\n\nAmong other specific concerns raised, youth were interested in leisure possibilities in the\nL\u00f3vua site, including activities such as football and karate lessons.\n\n##### **Conclusion**\n\n\nThe level of knowledge of the refugees about relocation plans to L\u00f3vua varied across age,\nsex and gender, as did their attitude towards the relocation. For instance, groups of elderly\nrefugees were largely pleased about moving to L\u00f3vua provided they would be assisted with\nthe relocation process and building of their shelters. Many others expressed their\nwillingness to relocate if the security concerns could be alleviated. While some remained\nsceptic about the relocation, expressing their preference to stay in current reception\ncentres or return to the DRC, most persons seemed intrigued and the youth even excited\nabout moving to the new site after receiving clarifications about the foreseen development\nplan. Some inquired if their family (Angolan nationality) living in Dundo could register as\nrefugees for all of them to move together in L\u00f3vua. Finally, after obtaining more information\nabout L\u00f3vua, many refugees seemed to view the relocation generally as an opportunity,\nalbeit an unknown one, on which more information would be welcome.\n\n\nThe focus group discussions confirmed the need to build a strong peaceful co-existence\nprogramme inclusive of the host community, and in which livelihoods, energy and\nenvironmental planning play a strong role. A broader sensitization and information\ncampaign on relocation to L\u00f3vua and the site itself is considered essential for refugees\u2019\ninformed decision-making. The campaign will particularly need to address the unfounded\nrumours. Further focus group discussions will be conducted with the urban refugee\npopulation.\n\n\nUNHCR / 19, July, 2017 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA.\n\n###### Annex I: Focus Group Discussion Protocol\n\n\n**Focus Group Discussion Protocol**\n**on Relocation of DRC refugees from Cacanda and Mussungue**\n**reception centres, and from Dundo town, to new site (L\u00f3vua) for**\n\n**more permanent accommodation and services**\n\n(Mussungue 23 - 24 June 2017)\n\n**Purpose**\n\nThe purpose of this protocol is to guide focus group discussions (FDG) with\nadolescents (13-17 years old), adults (18-59 years old) and elderly (60+),\nseparately for female and male refugees from the Democratic Republic of\nCongo (DRC) on relocation from two current reception centres, and Dundo\ntown, to the new site being built in L\u00f3vua, allocated by the Government of\nAngola to host the refugees from DRC on mid- and longer term. The\nobjective of these FGDs is to consult the refugee community in view of\nfinalizing the draft relocation plan and shelter package.\n\n\n**I.** **CONDUCTING a FGD**\n\n1. **Welcome participants** : _Good morning/afternoon. Thank you for taking the_\n\n_time to join us for this discussion today_ .\n2. **Introduce yourself** : _My name is __________, and I\u2019m here on behalf of_\n\n_____ (organization) ____, working on ______ (field) _____._\n\n3. **Explain purpose:** _We are conducting a series of discussions with the_\n\n_refugee community in Lunda Norte to learn from each other about: (1) how_\n_we should organize the relocation of refugees from Cacanda and_\n_Mussungue reception centres, as well as from Dundo town, to the new site_\n_being built in L\u00f3vua; (2) and to inform and consult you on the shelter_\n_package foreseen to build your family shelters, latrine and shower in L\u00f3vua._\n_We will discuss/focus on (1) how we can organize this relocation in the_\n_most suitable way; (2) obtain your advice regarding the shelter package;_\n_and (3) how we can encourage all members of the community to help make_\n_this relocation successful and efficient._\n4. **Explain your role:** _In the coming hour, I will be asking questions. I am_\n\n_interested to listen to all points of view in this room and I will not be_\n_participating in the discussion (_ explain the role of the note-taker and\ninterpreter, if any _)._\n5. **Ensure Confidentiality:** _We will be calling each other with our first names._\n\n_We are committed to maintain your confidentiality, we are interested in your_\n_points of view and not in who said what. We kindly ask you to respect the_\n_confidentiality of each other and not to say who said what when you leave_\n_this room. If you would like to tell us a relevant story from your community,_\n_please do not reveal the names of the people concerned, or any detail that_\n_might reveal their identities (_ notify participants beforehand that we are\ntaking notes).\n\n\n6 UNHCR / 19, July, 2017\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.9960753321647644,
-          "start": 0,
-          "end": 4
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.9156132936477661,
-          "start": 3,
-          "end": 4
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA",
-          "confidence": 0.6293798685073853,
-          "start": 10,
-          "end": 14
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7542985081672668,
-          "start": 83,
-          "end": 84
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "CONGOLESE REFUGEES",
-          "confidence": 0.5365822911262512,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION REPORT: RELOCATION OF CONGOLESE REFUGEES IN LUNDA NORTE, ANGOLA\n\n\n6. **Begin with introductions**\n7. **Explain the site structure**\n\n8. **Explain the preliminary relocation plans** : Feel free to ask participants\n\nfirst what they might have heard of the planned relocation before you\npresent the foreseen plan.\n9. **Explain the shelter package:** Simplify key concepts as much as possible.\n10. **Ask for feedback; move from general to specific questions if required.**\n\n\u00fc\uf0fc Explain discussion process to participants: \u201c _We will start now by_\n\n_discussing \u2026.\u201d_\n\n\u00fc\uf0fc For each of the themes, use open-ended questions to encourage\n\ndiscussion and explore participants\u2019 points of view. Note down\nrecurrent points and re-visit them as necessary.\n\n9. **Summarize keys points; encourage some general agreement** : _To_\n\n_summarize what we discussed, you think _______________. Does this_\n_capture the essence of what was said today?_\n10. **Thank participants, inform them about next steps:** _Thank you again for_\n\n_coming today. The points of view you shared today are really important to_\n_us and for the success of the relocation and for equitable/peaceful living_\n_conditions at the L\u00f3vua site. Thank you for helping us in planning this. We_\n_will make sure to take your opinions into consideration in the relocation_\n_plans to be launched next month, as well as in finalizing the shelter_\n_package._\n\n\nUNHCR / 19, July, 2017 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/259c9c93-fee4-3f89-a172-c93890a3f229/58557.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_112/raw/doc_112_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,274 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "JANUARY-JUNE 2017\n# DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nhad to break open the hold to free persons locked below deck. At least 33 people, including children, died in the incident. For more, see [here.](https://www.moas.eu/blogmoas-crews-exhausted-following-another-mass-tragedy-in-the-mediterranean)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "to have already died this year along that route compared\nto 2,470 in the same period last year. Those crossing from\nTurkey to Greece or Bulgaria have described terrifying night\njourneys across the short stretch of sea to Greece in which\nmore than 1,200 people have drowned since the start of\n2015, being held captive for extortion or else abandoned\nby smugglers, and being sent back across borders at night\nby masked police. Many of those arriving in Spain reported\nhardships during their journeys such as crossing the sea in\nflimsy inflatable boats or suffering violence while trying to\ncross the fences at the land border.\n\nThese risks do not end once in Europe. Those moving\nonwards irregularly from Greece and Bulgaria have reported\nabuses at the hands of smugglers, as well as being beaten,\nset upon by police dogs and pushed back by some border\nauthorities. Of the 40 reported deaths along land routes\nin the first six months of 2017, 29 (or 73%) have occurred\nas refugees and migrants have tried to travel onwards\nfrom one European Union (EU) Member State to another.\nAt least three of the deaths were of unaccompanied or\nseparated children (UASC). In February and March this\nyear, unaccompanied and separated children, including\nthose trying to join family members elsewhere in Europe,\ndescribed to UNICEF and REACH the many dangers they\nfaced during multiple attempts to try to cross from Italy to\nFrance, [6] a border region where six people have died since\nthe start of the year, while 20 people have died in eleven\nseparate incidents so far this year while trying to travel\nonwards irregularly from Greece and Bulgaria.\n\nThese desperate journeys show that a different and more\ncomprehensive response is required. This must include\n\n\n6 UNICEF and REACH, [Situation Overview: Unaccompanied and Separated Children in Transit](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57943)\n[in Ventimiglia, February 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57943)\n\n\n\nDESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nefforts to address the root causes of displacement, and\nmore support to help States receiving and hosting refugees\nto provide protection and solutions.\n\nDespite some progress in increasing the number of persons\nable to access safe pathways to Europe, these opportunities\nare far too few to offer a feasible alternative to risky irregular\njourneys for people in need of international protection.\nMore needs to be done to enable more refugees to enter\nlegally, including for those trying to join family members\nalready in the EU, rather than having to resort to irregular\nand dangerous journeys.\n\nWith so many lives at risk in the central Mediterranean,\nenhanced rescue at sea operations undertaken by all\nactors, including the Italian coastguard, NGOs, Frontex\nand crews of merchant ships must remain a priority. In\n2017, fewer people have died in mass drownings in the\nfirst six months than in the same period in 2016 thanks to\nthe quick response of rescuers, including to larger boats\ncarrying up to 700 people at a time, amongst other factors.\nThose rescued at sea need to be provided with adequate\nreception facilities and services, including swift access to\nasylum procedures. Particular measures are also needed\nto identify and assist those with specific needs, including\nunaccompanied children and survivors of sexual and\ngender-based violence.\n\nMore solidarity is needed within the EU to ensure protection\nand assistance to those arriving in Europe, including\nthrough the speeding up, and extension of the relocation\nscheme, as well as efficient and speedy family reunion\nand implementation of the humanitarian and discretionary\nclauses under Dublin.\n\n\n### ONE FAMILY\u2019S JOURNEY TO EUROPE\n\n_By: Mirjana Milenkovski_\n\nAbdul* was a renowned artist in Kabul. In spring 2016, after his work attracted threats from many sides, Abdul, his wife Rukiya\nand two small daughters decided to leave. It was to be the start of a lengthy journey.\n\nRelying on smugglers to cross borders, they crossed into Iran and then Turkey. There smugglers promised them an easy journey\nthrough Bulgaria but it was to be one of the hardest parts of the journey. To cross the border, they walked for nine hours, along\nslippery back roads in the pouring rain and hiding from anyone they saw, exhausted and with crying children. Rukiya slipped and\nsprained her ankle but there was no choice but to continue walking.\n\nAt last, they reached a house in a village where the smuggler told them to rest, warning them against leaving the house. At this\npoint, the smuggler started to increase his demands for more money, threatening Abdul and his family if they did not comply\nand pay him $2,000.\n\n**\u201cThey told me that they would take my daughters and we\u2019d never see them again if we fail to pay,\u201d** Abdul recounts while his\nwife, sitting next to him, breaks down in tears. \u201cI was terrified, beside myself with worry and grief! I hid my tears, so that the\n\nchildren would not realise that something was wrong. And I kept telling\nmyself they should see only determination and courage in their parents.\u201d\n\nFearing for their safety, the family decided to make their own way onwards.\nThey contacted a \u2018guide\u2019 who promised to take them to Serbia, this time\ndemanding \u20ac2,500. \u201cThe smugglers are ruthless, they size you up and\ndecide on the spot how much they will charge you,\u201d Rukiya says.\n\n\n\nquested that their faces not be shown to protect their identities.\n\n\n\nIn the autumn of 2016, after five nights trying to cross the border irregularly,\nAbdul\u2019s family and 15 other refugees crossed into Serbia. Traumatized by\nthe journey thus far, their youngest child begged them to stop. So they\nregistered with Serbian authorities and have been accommodated and\nassisted in a reception facility in Serbia since.\n\n\n\n\n - Names changed for protection reasons\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n## EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\n\nSyrians and Iraqis comprise around half of arrivals by sea to Greece.\n\nThe number of refugees and migrants who travelled via the Eastern Mediterranean route in the first six months was 92% lower\nthan in the same period in 2016.\n\nOver 1,900 refugees and migrants, mostly from Iraq, have crossed by boat from Turkey to Italy since the start of 2017.\n\nAllegations of push-backs and human rights violations in border areas have continued in 2017.\n\nRefugees and migrants continued to travel onwards irregularly, facing multiple dangers, including robberies at the hands of\ncriminal gangs, abuses by smugglers and some state authorities, as well as the risk of death while trying to avoid detection.\n\n\n\nIn the first six months of 2017, 9,286 refugees and\nmigrants crossed the sea from Turkey to Greece\nwith many in need of international protection.\nAmongst arrivals during this period, Syrian nationals\ncontinued to be the largest group comprising 37%,\nfollowed by nationals of Iraqi (13%), the Democratic\nRepublic of Congo (7%), Afghanistan (6%) and\nAlgeria (6%). While the number of crossings between\nJanuary and April this year was vastly lower (97%)\nthan during the same period in 2016, the number of\n\n\n\nAs of the end of June, 46% of arrivals by sea were\nmale, with 22% women and 32% children. Many\nSyrians and Iraqis continue to arrive in family groups\nand 40% of Syrian arrivals since the start of the year\nhave been children, along with 35% men and 25%\nwomen. Based on individual interviews conducted\nby UNHCR and partners, it appears that a number of\nwomen, particularly from Africa, crossing to Greece\nby sea are survivors of sexual and gender-based\nviolence, either in their country of origin or during\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "individual interviews",
-          "confidence": 0.934190034866333,
-          "start": 305,
-          "end": 307
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.766435980796814,
-          "start": 309,
-          "end": 310
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.833310067653656,
-          "start": 323,
-          "end": 324
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nCOUNTRY OF ORIGIN OF PRIMARY GROUPS ARRIVING BY SEA TO GREECE - JAN TO JUN 2017\n\n\n0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%\n\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\n\nIraq\n\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nAlgeria\n\n\nPakistan\n\n\nStateless\n\n\nPalestine\n\n\nIran\n\n\nKuwait\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSyrians, of which 35 were children, on 27 June. [12]\nMany Syrians arriving in Cyprus report crossing\nirregularly from Turkey to join family members\nalready granted protection in Cyprus, including\nhusbands and fathers. Many Syrians in Cyprus are\ngranted subsidiary protection rather than refugee\nstatus and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection in\nCyprus are not eligible for family reunification.\n\nAt Turkey\u2019s land borders with Europe, the number\nof refugees and migrants apprehended in Bulgaria\nhas fallen drastically in the past six months with just\n192 previously unregistered persons apprehended\nor intercepted at entry or exit points or in the\ninterior of the country in May and 172 in June. These\ncontributed to a total of 1,461 persons apprehended\nfor being undocumented in Bulgaria in the first\nsix months of 2017, an 80% decrease compared\nto the same time period last year. Most of those\napprehended in Bulgaria since the start of the year\nhave been from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. The\nreduced apprehensions occurred in a period in\nwhich Bulgaria has fenced an extended area of the\nborder. In mid-June, it was reported that only 5km of\nthe intended fenced area are still to be completed. [13]\nSeveral push-backs from Bulgaria have also been\nreported since the start of the year.\n\nIn contrast and likely in part due to the increased\nBulgarian restrictions, thousands continue to try to\ncross the land border between Turkey and Greece.\nBetween January and the end of June, the Turkish\nLand Forces reported intercepting 10,382 persons,\namounting to an average of 57 per day. According\nto Hellenic Police figures, 841 refugees and migrants\nhad crossed from Turkey to Greece irregularly as of\nthe end of May. [14] In June, high numbers of arrivals\nin Greece\u2019s Evros region were reported with around\n500 refugees and migrants, mostly from Syria,\nPakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan, arriving in the space\nof four days. They contributed to an estimated total\nof 1,500 arrivals via the Turkey-Greece land border\n\n\n12 Turkish Coast Guard Command, [Current activities, 27 June 2017.](http://www.sahilguvenlik.gov.tr/haberdetay/2017/haziran/27haziran2017_sigacik.pdf)\n13 Ministry of Interior, [https://press.mvr.bg/NEWS/news170617_04.htm, 17](https://press.mvr.bg/NEWS/news170617_04.htm)\nJune 2017.\n14 Hellenic Police, [\u03a3\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03af, \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7](http://www.astynomia.gr/images/stories//2017/statistics17/allodapwn/5_statistics_all_2017_methorio.png)\n[\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf & \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae, \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u0391\u03c1\u03c7\u03ad\u03c2, June 2017.](http://www.astynomia.gr/images/stories//2017/statistics17/allodapwn/5_statistics_all_2017_methorio.png)\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nGreek islands in May and June this year, the number\nof interceptions or rescues by the Turkish Coast\nGuard in these two months this year has been\nhigher than in the same period last year.\n\nIn May and June, more than 1,000 refugees and\nmigrants arrived in Italy by boat from Turkey, a\ntotal of 1,941 for the year. [10] So far, the majority of\narrivals using this route have been from Iraq with\nsome having indicated arranging their travel whilst\nin Iraq. Of the 2,323 Iraqis arriving in Europe by\nsea from Turkey in 2017 by the end of June, 46%\narrived in Italy. A group arriving at the end of June\nreported having departed Iraq just over two weeks\nprior to arriving in Italy. Many reported paying up\nto $6,000 for the journey, far more than the fees\npaid to cross from Turkey to Greece. Pakistani and\nSomali nationals comprise the next two largest\ngroups arriving in Italy directly from Turkey and for\nboth, the numbers reaching Italy by sea from Turkey\nare higher than those reaching Greece by sea from\nTurkey by the end of June this year. Several Somali\nnationals have reported traveling to Sudan, then\nIran, then Turkey in order to reach Italy, a lengthy,\nrisky and expensive journey. In June, an Iranian man\ndied during the journey from Turkey to Italy after\nbecoming very sick and distressed due to the dire\nconditions during the six-day voyage.\n\nAdditional vessels headed from Turkey to Italy have\nbeen intercepted by the Turkish Coast Guard or else\nhave required rescue off the coast of Greece. Some\n450 refugees and migrants believed to have been\nheaded to Italy from Turkey have been rescued off\nthe coast of Greece in separate occasions since the\nstart of the year. [11]\n\nOthers departing Turkey by sea continue to cross\nto Cyprus. While 302 persons mostly from Syria\nhad crossed to Cyprus from Turkey in the first four\nmonths of 2017, no further arrivals were recorded\nin May or June. However, others continued to\nbe intercepted by the Turkish Coast Guard while\nattempting the crossing including a group of 100\n\n\n10 UNHCR, [Italy: Sea arrivals dashboard: January to June 2017, July 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58489)\n[11 See, for example, Ekathimerini, Italy-bound migrants land on Crete, 1](http://www.ekathimerini.com/219733/article/ekathimerini/news/italy-bound-migrants-land-on-crete)\nJuly 2017.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "in the first six months of 2017. Of those referred\nto the Evros Reception and Identification Centre\nsince the start of the year, most have been from\nPakistan, Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Afghanistan. In\naddition, amongst arrivals since the start of the year,\na steady increase has been noted in the number\nof unaccompanied and separated children from\nPakistan with most between the ages of 15 and 17.\n\nIn addition to the high number of interceptions\nby Turkish authorities at the Greece-Turkey land\nborder, UNHCR continues to receive testimonies\nof people seeking international protection who\nhave been irregularly returned to Turkey. In June,\nUNHCR issued a statement calling for a thorough\ninvestigation by Greek authorities into the\nallegations of push-backs. [15] Investigations are now\nproceeding. [16]\n\nNo further deaths have been reported during\nattempts to cross Turkey\u2019s land borders in May\nand June so the number of deaths during border\ncrossings here since the start of the year remains\nnine, most of whom died during winter. [17]\n\n**Onward Movement from Greece and Bulgaria**\n\nRefugees and migrants continued to travel onwards\nirregularly towards other EU Member States from\nGreece and Bulgaria in the first six months of 2017,\nincluding in efforts to reunify with family members\nelsewhere in the EU. Those moving on irregularly\nfrom Greece and Bulgaria face multiple dangers\nas they travel towards other EU Member States,\nincluding robberies at the hands of criminal gangs,\nabuses by smugglers and some state authorities,\nas well as the risk of death while trying to avoid\ndetection. Since the start of the year, 20 of the 40\n\n\n15  UNHCR, [UNHCR deeply concerned at reports of informal forced returns](http://www.unhcr.gr/nea/artikel/e075a82d656e43bad0db25768aec44fb/unhcr-deeply-concerned-at-reports-of.html)\n[from Greece to Turkey, 8 June 2017.](http://www.unhcr.gr/nea/artikel/e075a82d656e43bad0db25768aec44fb/unhcr-deeply-concerned-at-reports-of.html)\n16  The Greek Ombudsman, [Ex ofcio investigations for the anaesthesiol-](https://www.synigoros.gr/?i=stp.en.news.436281)\n[ogists and alleged readmissions to Turkey, 9 June 2017; Ekathimerini, Probe](https://www.synigoros.gr/?i=stp.en.news.436281)\n[under way into claims of pushbacks at Greek border, 20 June 2017.](http://www.ekathimerini.com/219407/article/ekathimerini/news/probe-under-way-into-claims-of-pushbacks-at-greek-border)\n17 UNHCR, Desperate Journeys: January to April 2017.\n\n\n\nDESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nrefugees and migrants reported killed along land\nroutes during attempts to cross borders irregularly\nhave died while trying to move on irregularly\nfrom Greece and Bulgaria to another EU Member\nState. In addition to the deaths previously reported\nbetween January and April this year, [18] another nine\nAfghan and Pakistani nationals died in Bulgaria in\na minibus crash. The vehicle was reportedly driven\nby an unlicensed 16-year-old. [19] In May, a Pakistani\nnational was killed and another severely injured\nafter they fell while trying to board a train in Croatia [20]\nwhile in early June, an unknown man was found\nelectrocuted near freight trains in Thessaloniki,\nGreece after it is believed he tried to hide aboard\na train headed to the former Yugoslav Republic of\nMacedonia. [21] On 23 June, a 15-year-old Afghan\nunaccompanied child died and a 13-year-old was\nseverely injured after they jumped out of a moving\ntruck near the Croatia-Serbia border after realizing\nthat it was headed to Belgrade rather than crossing\nthe border. [22]\n\nOf those moving onwards irregularly, most travel\nfrom Greece via the former Yugoslav Republic of\nMacedonia to Serbia or cross directly from Bulgaria\nto Serbia in order to then try to cross to Hungary,\nCroatia, or Romania. Other routes onwards from\nGreece include a land route used by smaller\nnumbers of people via Albania and Montenegro or\nKosovo, [23] or with smugglers by boat to Italy, or else\nby ferry to Italy using false documents or hiding in a\nvehicle during its embarkation. Since the start of the\nyear, Greek authorities have reported intercepting\nover 1,300 refugees and migrants attempting to\ndepart the country irregularly by sea.\n\n\n18 Ibid.\n19 DW, [Several migrants killed in smuggler bus crash in Bulgaria, 5 June](http://www.dw.com/en/several-migrants-killed-in-smuggler-bus-crash-in-bulgaria/a-39115451)\n2017.\n20 Are You Syrious, [Daily Digest, 23 May 2017.](https://medium.com/@AreYouSyrious/ays-daily-digest-23-05-2017-human-rights-are-at-risk-in-greece-d929d49a0256)\n21 \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03a3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u039c\u0391\u039a\u0395\u0394\u039f\u039d\u0399\u0391, [\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2](http://\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u0394\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae)\n[\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u0394\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae, 2 June 2017.](http://\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u0394\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae)\n[22 UNHCR, Serbia update: 19-25 June 2017, June 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58187)\n23  References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of\nSecurity Council resolution 1244 (1999).\n\n\n\nMONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS IN GREECE BY COUNTRY OF ORIGIN - JAN TO JUN 2017\n\n\n800\n\n\n\n700\n\n\n600\n\n\n500\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic 413 434 678 447 694 725\n\nIraq 109 104 163 185 375 312\n\nCongo, Democratic Repulic of 118 89 51 42 160 172\n\nAfghanistan 51 77 56 77 127 150\n\nAlgeria 198 39 41 56 111 62\n\n\nArrival figures for Greece are provided by the Hellenic Coast Guard and Police. All figures are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "In the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,\nUNHCR staff reported the arrival of over 2,400\nrefugees and migrants thought to have crossed\nfrom Greece between April and June. [24] Most of\nthose recorded were men and from Pakistan and\nAfghanistan. Once in the former Yugoslav Republic\nof Macedonia, most try to transit the country by\ncar with the help of smugglers, although some try\nto cross the country on foot. UNHCR continues\nto observe push-backs from the former Yugoslav\nRepublic of Macedonia to Greece. More than 660\npeople, including from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria\nand Iraq, are reported to have been irregularly\nreturned to Greece over the past three months. Most\nof those recorded as having been pushed back were\nfrom Afghanistan and Pakistan, but also included\nSyrians and Iraqis. UNHCR staff and partners in\nthe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia have\nalso continued to document refugees and migrants\nbeing pushed back from Serbia. UNHCR staff and\npartners have noted the return of over 700 persons,\nmostly Afghans, Pakistanis, Algerians, and Syrians,\n\n\n24  In the absence of official statistics on irregular migration, UNHCR notes\n\n\n\nDESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nfrom Serbia since the start of the year. Most have\nbeen pushed back but a smaller number are\nthought to be attempting to return irregularly to\nGreece, including due to the lengthy waiting period\nfor admission to the Hungarian \u2018transit zones\u2019.\n\nUNHCR and partners in Serbia have recorded the\narrival of over 2,500 refugees and migrants since\nthe start of the year. [25] Of those encountered by\nUNHCR, around 60% have reported arriving via\nBulgaria, with 36% reporting crossing via the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and another 4%\nusing other routes. Most of these new arrivals were\nnationals of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Syria\nand 37% were women and children, including over\n300 unaccompanied and separated children. As\nof the end of June, 5,810 refugees and migrants\nwere recorded as being present in Serbia, a 21%\ndecrease from April, with 93% in governmental\nfacilities, the majority waiting for their turn for\nadmission to the two Hungarian \u2018transit zones\u2019, which\ncontinue to admit just 10 per week day. Of those in\n\n\n25  In the absence of official statistics on irregular migration, UNHCR notes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nauthorities worked to secure their reunion.\n\n\n\ngovernmental facilities, 80% were from Afghanistan,\nIraq and Syria and 52% were women and children.\nOnly 151 persons have so far applied for asylum in\nSerbia this year with others reporting concerns over\nlengthy and unreliable asylum procedures, limited\nemployment and integration prospects, as well as a\nlack of existing family and community ties.\n\nIn light of the very limited numbers able to enter\nHungary legally each day, many attempt to enter\nHungary or other states neighbouring Serbia\nirregularly. Since the start of the year, Hungary has\nreported apprehending 3,958 people on its territory\nand returning them to the other side of the fence\nat the Serbian border and UNHCR Serbia and its\npartners have received multiple accounts of people\nbeing denied access to asylum procedures as well as\nallegations of violence by border authorities. Others\ntry to move from Serbia to Croatia or Romania.\nCroatian officials have reported the irregular entry\nof 949 persons since the start of the year, most\nof whom entered from Serbia. However, UNHCR\nSerbia and its partners have also received reports\nof more than a thousand refugees and migrants\npushed back from Croatia since the start of the\nyear with many alleging they were denied access\nto asylum procedures and some reporting violence\nby border authorities. [26] Romanian authorities have\nrecorded the irregular entries of 1,190 refugees and\nmigrants crossing from Serbia in the first six months\nof 2017, with numbers dropping considerably in\nMay (197) and June (12) from the 609 recorded as\nentering from Serbia in April. At the same time,\nsince April UNHCR and partners in Serbia have\nconsistently received reports of alleged push-backs\nfrom Romania, including allegations of violence by\nborder authorities. [27]\n\n\n26 UNHCR, [Serbia Monthly Snapshot \u2013 May 2017, June 2017; UNHCR,](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57724)\n[Serbia Monthly Snapshot \u2013 June 2017, July 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58581)\n27 Ibid.\n\n\n\nIn the first six months of the year, 1,440 asylumseekers were granted admission to Hungary via the\ntwo \u2018transit zones\u2019, an average of 240 per month.\nAsylum-seekers entering Hungary via the \u2018transit\nzones\u2019 are automatically detained for the duration\nof their asylum processing. In March, UNHCR noted\nthat Hungary\u2019s new asylum law violated Hungary\u2019s\nobligations under international and EU laws and\nwould have a significant impact on women, children\nand men. [28] The European Commission is following\nup on the infringement procedure on account of the\namendments to Hungary\u2019s asylum law. [29]\n\nAsylum-seekers, including families and\nunaccompanied children, arriving in Hungary via the\n\u2018transit zones\u2019 have recounted to UNHCR lengthy\njourneys of up 14 months and multiple hardships\nthey have endured on the way. Some have been\nheld hostage by smugglers demanding additional\npayments and being provided with very limited\nfood, endured lengthy journeys of up to 20 hours\non foot at a time, and been beaten by police and\npushed back across borders, sometimes more than\nonce.\n\nOf those attempting to depart from Bulgaria,\nBulgarian authorities have intercepted 1,880\nrefugees and migrants at exit points in the first six\nmonths of 2017, 88% of whom were intercepted at the\nBulgaria-Serbia border. Of all of those intercepted,\nonly 221 had not been previously registered by\nBulgarian authorities. Most of those intercepted\nat exit points have been from Afghanistan. Others\nmoving onwards from Bulgaria try to cross to\nRomania and since the start of the year, Romanian\nauthorities have recorded the irregular entry of 68\nrefugees and migrants from Bulgaria.\n\n\n28 UNHCR, [UNHCR deeply concerned by Hungary plans to detain all](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asylum-seekers.html)\n[asylum seekers, 7 March 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/3/58be80454/unhcr-deeply-concerned-hungary-plans-detain-asylum-seekers.html)\n29 European Commission, [Commission follows up on infringement proce-](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1285_en.htm)\n[dure against Hungary concerning its asylum, 17 May 2017.](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1285_en.htm)\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The number of refugees and migrants that crossed\nthe central Mediterranean from North Africa in the\nfirst half of 2017 rose 19% compared to the same\nperiod last year. However, lower numbers crossing\nthe sea from Libya in July meant that the number\nof arrivals in Italy in the first seven months of 2017\nremained at a similar level to the same period in\n2016. Persons arriving in Italy continue to report\nhaving overcome multiple hardships during their\njourneys including dangerous desert crossings, [30]\nand widespread human rights abuses in Libya. [31]\nMany women and girls, and some men and boys, are\nreported to have suffered sexual violence at some\npoint during their journey, including in detention\nin Libya, at police or army checkpoints during the\njourney, or at the hands of smugglers and traffickers\nwhile travelling to or in Libya. UNHCR continues to\nhear reports of abuses in detention and persons\nkidnapped or detained for ransom. In June, UNHCR\nand IOM released a joint statement after a video was\ncirculated showing around 260 Somali and Ethiopian\nnationals held captive in Libya and reporting horrific\nabuse by their captors to extract ransom payments. [32]\nUNHCR has stepped up its assistance in Libya\nduring a visit by High Commissioner, Filippo Grandi,\nthe newly-appointed Special Envoy to the Central\nMediterranean Situation, Vincent Cochetel, and\n\n\n30 UNHCR, News comment: UNHCR shocked at deaths in Sahara desert.\n31 UN Security Council, [Final report of the Panel of Experts on Libya](http://undocs.org/S/2017/466)\n[established pursuant to resolution 1973 (2011), 1 June 2017; United Nations](http://undocs.org/S/2017/466)\n[Support Mission in Libya and OHCHR, Detained and Dehumanised, 13](http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/LY/DetainedAndDehumanised_en.pdf)\nDecember 2016.\n32 IOM, [Facebook video circulates showing 260 Somali and Ethiopian](https://www.iom.int/news/facebook-video-circulates-showing-260-somali-and-ethiopian-migrants-and-refugees-abused-held)\n[Migrants and Refugees Abused, Held against their Will by Gangs in Libya, 15](https://www.iom.int/news/facebook-video-circulates-showing-260-somali-and-ethiopian-migrants-and-refugees-abused-held)\nJune 2017.\n\n\n\nthe Regional Director for the Middle East and North\nAfrica, Amin Awad, to the country in May. [33]\n\nResearch by the University of Warwick [34] and the\nMEDMIG project [35] suggests that many of those who\nultimately end up crossing the central Mediterranean\nto Italy may not intend to do so when they leave their\ncountries of origin. In the two studies, some set off\nwith no clear destination in mind or an alternative\ndestination but conditions in countries along the way\nencouraged them to keep moving onwards. Others\nhad initially fled to a country in the region seeking\ninternational protection but ultimately decided to\nmove on because of lack of effective protection and\nassistance, while some of those who have crossed to\nEurope still had no intention to cross the sea even up\nto the time of departure but were forced into boats,\neither against their will or without knowing what\nwas happening, sometimes after asking employers\nfor their money. Similarly, only 46% of the 720\nunaccompanied and separated children interviewed\nby UNICEF and REACH in Italy between December\n2016 and May 2017 left home with the intention of\ncrossing to Europe. [36]\n\n\n33 UNHCR, [As Libya crisis deepens, UNHCR chief steps up assistance, 22](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2017/5/5922a4df4/libya-crisis-deepens-unhcr-chief-steps-assistance.html)\nMay 2017.\n34 V. Squire, A. Dimitriadi, N. Perkowski, M.Pisani, D. Stevens, N.\nVaughan-Williams, [Crossing the Mediterranean Sea by Boat: Mapping and](http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/irs/crossingthemed/ctm_final_report_4may2017.pdf)\n[Documenting Migratory Journeys and Experiences, Final Project Report, 4](http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/irs/crossingthemed/ctm_final_report_4may2017.pdf)\nMay 2017.\n35 McMahon, S. and Sigona, N. [Boat migration across the Central Mediter-](http://www.medmig.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/research-brief-03-Boat-migration-across-the-Central-Mediterranean.pdf)\n[ranean: drivers, experiences and responses, MEDMIG Research Brief No.3, 3](http://www.medmig.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/research-brief-03-Boat-migration-across-the-Central-Mediterranean.pdf)\nSeptember 2016.\n36 UNICEF and REACH, [Children on the move in Italy and Greece, July](https://www.unicef.it/Allegati/REACH_Report_Children_on_the_Move_in_Italy_and_Greece_June_2017.pdf)\n2017.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\n\n\n\n25,000\n\n\n20,000\n\n\n15,000\n\n\n10,000\n\n\n5,000\n\n\n     \n\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec\n\n\n2013 2014 2015 2016 2017\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nand migrants at sea. In May and June, the Libyan\nCoast Guard conducted several interceptions in\ninternational waters, including two incidents in which\nthe coast guard intervened once a rescue by an NGO\nhad already been initiated. Video footage from one\nincident on 10 May appears to show a coast guard\nvessel performing a dangerous manoeuvre across\nthe path of an NGO rescue vessel [42] as well as the\ncaptain of the Libyan vessel pointing a firearm at\nthe persons on the boat being rescued. [43] In another\nincident on 23 May, Libyan Coast Guard personnel\nallegedly fired shots into the air during the course\nof a rescue and took personal items from persons\non an inflatable boat, prompting many of those on\nboard the boat to jump in the water in panic where\nthey were later rescued by an NGO vessel. [44]\n\nBetween January and June, most arrivals by sea\nin Italy were from Nigeria (17%), Bangladesh (10%),\nGuinea (9%), C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire (9%), and The Gambia\n(6%). Whilst the number of Nigerians, Guineans and\nIvoirians continue to increase in accordance with\ntypical seasonal trends, the number of Bangladeshi\narrivals dropped in June to less than half the number\nof arrivals in May. This follows a move by Mitiga\nairport in Tripoli to ban entries by several nationalities\nincluding citizens of Bangladesh. [45] Although still\nrelatively small compared with the number of arrivals\nby other nationalities, Syrian arrivals to Italy by sea\nhave increased significantly to 1,601 in the first six\nmonths of 2017 compared to 195 in the same period\nin 2016. Some Syrian arrivals reported residing\nin Libya for a long time and departing to Italy on\naccount of the deteriorating security situation in\nLibya. Others reported leaving from the Middle East\n(Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, and Jordan) to Sudan before\ntravelling onward to Libya and then Italy.\n\nEurostat data shows that in the first quarter of\n2017, the average rate of protection by nationality,\nincluding humanitarian status, granted to the 10 most\ncommon nationalities that arrived in Italy in the first\nsix months of 2017 [46] was 34% in the EU+ region, with\na recognition rate for refugee status or subsidiary\n\n\n42  Sea Watch, [Libyan navy is risking lives of Sea-Watch crew and refugees](https://sea-watch.org/en/libyan-navy-is-putting-sea-watch-crew-and-refugees-into-danger-during-an-illegal-return-operation/)\n[during illegal return operation, 10 May 2017.](https://sea-watch.org/en/libyan-navy-is-putting-sea-watch-crew-and-refugees-into-danger-during-an-illegal-return-operation/)\n[43 Spiegel TV, Sea Watch gegen libysche K\u00fcstenwache, May 2017.](http://www.spiegel.tv/videos/207832-sea-watch-gegen-libysche-kuestenwache)\n44 MSF, [MSF accuses Libyan coastguard of endangering people\u2019s lives](http://www.msf.org/en/article/msf-accuses-libyan-coastguard-endangering-people%E2%80%99s-lives-during-mediterranean-rescue)\n[during Mediterranean rescue, 24 May 2017.](http://www.msf.org/en/article/msf-accuses-libyan-coastguard-endangering-people%E2%80%99s-lives-during-mediterranean-rescue)\n[45 Libyan Express, Mitiga airport authorities ban entries of fve countries\u2019](http://www.libyanexpress.com/mitiga-airport-authorities-ban-entries-of-five-countries-to-tripoli/)\n[nationals to Tripoli, 8 May 2017.](http://www.libyanexpress.com/mitiga-airport-authorities-ban-entries-of-five-countries-to-tripoli/)\n46  Nationals of Nigeria, Bangladesh, Guinea, C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, The Gambia,\nSenegal, Mali, Eritrea, Morocco, and Sudan.\n\n\n\nRead more about sea\narrivals to Italy:\n\n\n\nOff the coast of Libya, the departure point for\napproximately 96% of those arriving in Italy, the\ntragedy continues to unfold with NGOs, and\nsometimes merchant vessels, filling gaps in search\nand rescue capacity. Since the start of the year,\nas of the end of May, [37] NGOs contributed 37% of\nthe rescues in 2017 compared to 6% in the same\nperiod in 2016. Merchant vessels contributed 15%\nof rescues in the first five months of 2017 (including\n28% of rescues in April) compared to 14% in the\nsame period in 2016. [38] While merchant vessels play\na valuable role in helping save lives in the absence\nof other vessels, reliance on the intervention of such\nvessels is not a substitute for the presence of trained\nsearch and rescue actors. In the past months, several\nincidents have highlighted the need for increased\nresources dedicated to search and rescue in the\ncentral Mediterranean.\n\nThe high number of deaths at sea continues with\nan estimated 686 people dying in the central\nMediterranean in May and another 300 in June,\ncontributing to an estimated total of 2,171 in the\ncentral Mediterranean in the first six months of\n2017. [39] As of the end of June, there have been 16\nincidents in which 50 or more people are thought to\nhave lost their lives at sea this year [40] but there have\nbeen no mass drownings of over 200 persons so\nfar this year, including due to the quick response of\nrescuers. [41] As a result, compared to the same period\nin 2016, the number of deaths has dropped by 12%.\nThe rate of deaths in the central Mediterranean for\nthe first six months of 2017 was one for every 39 who\nreached Italy compared to one for every 28 in the\nsame period in 2016.\n\nIn the first six months of the year, the Libyan Coast\nGuard has rescued or intercepted 8,165 refugees\n\n\n37  Italian Coast Guard, [Attivit\u00e0 S.A.R. (Search and Rescue) nel Mediterra-](http://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/attivita/Documents/attivita-sar-immigrazione-2017/Maggio%20ita.pdf)\n[neo Centrale \u2013 Maggio 2017, July 2017.](http://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/attivita/Documents/attivita-sar-immigrazione-2017/Maggio%20ita.pdf)\n38  Data for rescues in June was not yet available at the time of publication.\n39 UNHCR, [Europe: Dead and missing at sea, July 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58419)\n40 UNHCR, [World Refugee Day \u2013 Reports of three new shipwrecks in the](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/6/5948dfb64/world-refugee-day-reports-three-new-shipwrecks-mediterranean-sea.html)\n[Mediterranean Sea, 20 June, 20 June 2017; UNHCR, News comment on lat-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/6/5948dfb64/world-refugee-day-reports-three-new-shipwrecks-mediterranean-sea.html)\n[est shipwrecks on Mediterranean Sea, 11 June 2017; UNHCR, Twenty feared](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/6/593d55bb4/news-comment-latest-shipwrecks-mediterranean-sea.html)\n[dead in latest Mediterranean tragedy, 16 May 2017; UNHCR,](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/5/591ab64c4/twenty-feared-dead-latest-mediterranean-tragedy.html) [Update on two](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/5/591178294/update-shipwrecks-central-mediterranean.html)\n[shipwrecks in the Central Mediterranean, 9 May 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2017/5/591178294/update-shipwrecks-central-mediterranean.html)\n41   According to UNHCR fgures, between January and June 2016, 1,885\npeople are thought to have drowned in five incidents in which the number of\npersons who died was over 100. Of those incidents, all involved casualties of\nover 200 persons and two involved 500 or more deaths. In the same period\nin 2017, 1,080 people are thought to have died in eight incidents in which\n100 or more people died. Of these, the largest number of deaths was in an\nincident in January when 176 people are thought to have died.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 0\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nPROPORTION OF RESCUES IN THE CENTRAL MEDITERRANEAN - JAN 2016 to MAY 2017\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nState authorities* Merchant vessels NGOs _Source: Italian Coast Guard_\n\n\n              - Includes Italian Coast Guard and Navy, vessels deployed as part of Frontex's Operation Triton and EUNAVFOR Med's Operation Sophia, as well as other military vessels\n\n\n\nprotection of approximately 22%. In Italy, of the\n37,213 asylum decisions issued by the Territorial\nCommissions since the start of the year, 42%\nwere granted some form of protection, including\nhumanitarian status, with 9% granted refugee status\nand 9% granted subsidiary protection.\n\nMost arrivals in Italy in the first half of 2017 were men\nbut the trend of high numbers of unaccompanied\nchildren amongst arrivals continued, with 11,406\nUASC arrivals in this period or 14% of all arrivals. As\nof the end of June, most UASC were from Guinea,\nBangladesh, C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, The Gambia and Nigeria\nand most were boys between the age of 16 and 17. [47]\nAssessments conducted earlier this year with UASC\nfrom Guinea, The Gambia and Nigeria who had\ncrossed the sea to Italy showed that only between\n48% (of the Guineans) and 58% (of the Gambians) of\nthe groups interviewed had initially intended to come\nto Europe when they left their country of origin. They\nhad travelled for between 12 and 14 months since\nleaving home until they reached Europe. Reasons for\nleaving home primarily varied between persecution,\nthe desire for better economic opportunities, and\nproblems or violence at home. Most reported\nspending more than a month in Libya with 66% of the\nGuinean and Nigerian children interviewed reporting\nbeing kidnapped and imprisoned. [48]\n\nAlthough only 11% of arrivals were women, the\nproportion amongst Nigerians was far higher (30%).\nThe proportion of women amongst Ethiopians and\n\n\n47 UNHCR, [Italy: Unaccompanied and Separated Children (UASC) Dash-](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58490)\n[board \u2013 June 2017, July 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58490)\n48 UNICEF and REACH, [Unaccompanied and Separated Children from](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57946)\n[The Gambia in Italy, May 2017; UNICEF and REACH, Unaccompanied and](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57946)\n[Separated Children from Guinea Conakry in Italy, May 2017; and UNICEF and](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57947)\n[REACH, Unaccompanied and Separated Children from Nigeria, May 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57945)\n\n\n\nSomalis (both 22%) was also higher than amongst\nothers. Concerns about the trafficking of women\nto Europe via the Central Mediterranean route,\nparticularly of Nigerians, continue. [49] While many\nNigerian women have been recruited directly from\nNigeria, others arriving in Italy are still vulnerable to\nrecruitment by trafficking networks. [50]\n\nAs of the end of June, over 200,000 refugees and\nmigrants are estimated to be in reception centres\nacross Italy. While over 72,700 people have applied\nfor asylum in Italy since the start of the year, others\nstill continue to try to depart irregularly. Since the\nstart of the year, eight refugees and migrants were\nreported to have died while trying to cross from Italy\ninto neighbouring countries irregularly. Six of the\neight deaths occurred in the vicinity of Ventimiglia\nat the border with France, contributing to a total of at\nleast 12 deaths at this border in the past year.\n\nSome UASC have been sleeping rough near the river\nin Ventimiglia. [51] In an assessment earlier this year\nby REACH and UNICEF with UASC in Ventimiglia,\nchildren described sleeping on the street and\nrepeated attempts to cross the border by hiding\non trains or taking the dangerous route through\nthe mountains [52] where a Sudanese man was killed\nearlier this year. [53]\n\n\n49  IOM, [UN Migration Agency Issues Report on Arrivals of Sexually](https://www.iom.int/news/un-migration-agency-issues-report-arrivals-sexually-exploited-migrants-chiefly-nigeria)\n[Exploited Migrants, Chiefy from Nigeria, 21 July 2017.](https://www.iom.int/news/un-migration-agency-issues-report-arrivals-sexually-exploited-migrants-chiefly-nigeria)\n[50 PRI, Nigerian women are being trafcked into Sicily at a rapidly increas-](https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-05-18/nigerian-women-are-being-trafficked-sicily-rapidly-increasing-rate)\n[ing rate, 18 May 2017.](https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-05-18/nigerian-women-are-being-trafficked-sicily-rapidly-increasing-rate)\n51 UNHCR, [Europe: Monthly Report, June 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57706)\n[52 UNICEF and REACH, Situation Overview: Unaccompanied and Separat-](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57943)\n[ed Children in Transit in Ventimiglia, February 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57943)\n[53 Il Secolo XIX, Un altro migrante morto per passare in Francia: trovato il](http://www.ilsecoloxix.it/p/imperia/2017/03/21/ASq2COhG-scarpata_francia_migrante.shtml)\n[corpo nella scarpata, 21 March 2017.](http://www.ilsecoloxix.it/p/imperia/2017/03/21/ASq2COhG-scarpata_francia_migrante.shtml)\n\n\n\nSEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY: MOST COMMON COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN - JAN 2016 to JUN 2017\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "asylum decisions",
-          "confidence": 0.8189975619316101,
-          "start": 72,
-          "end": 74
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Italy",
-          "confidence": 0.8203162550926208,
-          "start": 65,
-          "end": 66
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7246035933494568,
-          "start": 14,
-          "end": 15
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Assessments",
-          "confidence": 0.9284394383430481,
-          "start": 192,
-          "end": 193
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Report on Arrivals of Sexually",
-          "confidence": 0.5478829145431519,
-          "start": 698,
-          "end": 703
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Report",
-          "confidence": 0.5379048585891724,
-          "start": 698,
-          "end": 699
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.9050993323326111,
-          "start": 716,
-          "end": 717
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n## WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n|Canary Island arrivals<br>**133**|Ceuta arrivals<br>**1,294**|Ceuta arrivals<br>**1,294**|\n\n\nSea arrivals to Spain have increased 196% compared to the same period last year.\n\n\nThe sea crossing remains highly risky and 52 people are known to have died crossing the sea to Spain by the end\nof June.\n\n\nSyrians, often families, continue to arrive in Spain using diverse routes including through countries such as Sudan,\nMauritania, Mali, Algeria, and Morocco.\n\n\n\nThe number of refugees and migrants crossing from\nNorth Africa to Spain has increased by 93% this\nyear in comparison with the same period last year.\nBy the end of June, a total of 9,507 refugees and\nmigrants had crossed into Spain irregularly this year\nwith 6,228 crossing the sea to the Spanish mainland\nin small boats compared to 2,105 between January\nand June last year, an increase of 196%. In Ceuta\nand Melilla, irregular arrivals have also increased by\n28% to 3,166. A further 133 people have crossed to\nthe Canary Islands.\n\nIn the first six months of 2017, the five most common\nnationalities arriving in Spain were Guineans,\nIvoirians, Gambians, Moroccans, and Syrians. [54] As\nof the end of June, men comprised 81% of arrivals\nwith women making up 9% and children 10%. The\nlargest number of women arrivals were from C\u00f4te\nd\u2019Ivoire (237, constituting 15% of Ivoirian arrivals)\nand Syria (211, constituting 26% of Syrian arrivals).\nMost Ivoirian women crossed the sea to the Spanish\nmainland while most Syrian women crossed through\nthe border crossing point to Melilla. Most children\narriving in Spain were Syrian (368, comprising 46%\nof Syrian arrivals), an illustration of how most Syrian\narrivals continued to be family groups.\n\nTo get to Spain, Syrians have used a diverse range\n\n\n54 Based on the nationality breakdown provided by Spanish authorities.\nAs of the end of June, data for 2017 included 823 persons from Sub-Saharan\nAfrica whose nationalities had not yet been determined\n\n\n\nof routes. While some have been resident for some\ntime in Algeria, others have reported travelling from\nLebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt and using a\nvariety of routes including through countries such as\nSudan, Mauritania, Mali, Algeria and finally Morocco\nin order to avoid a dangerous sea journey to Italy.\nMany have told UNHCR that they have travelled\nthis way to reunify with family members already in\nEurope because of the lack of accessibility of formal\nfamily reunification mechanisms.\n\nIn April, a group of 41 Syrians, including two\npregnant women in need of medical care, as well as\ninfants and children, became stranded at the border\nbetween Morocco and Algeria near Figuig. [55] The\nsituation was resolved after seven weeks when the\n28 remaining members of the group were granted\nentry to Morocco. [56]\n\nTo cross the sea to Spain, most use inflatable boats\nusually holding between 35 and 40 persons. The\njourney is risky and already this year 52 people are\nbelieved to have died or gone missing at sea as\nof the end of June. In the first six months of 2017,\nmost deaths occurred in the Straits of Gibraltar\nbut several deaths have also occurred during the\nlonger sea journey in the Alboran Sea. In mid-June,\n\n\n55 UNHCR, [UNHCR statement on Syrians stranded between Algeria &](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/592d51e94/unhcr-statement-syrians-stranded-algeria-morocco.html)\n[Morocco, 30 May 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/592d51e94/unhcr-statement-syrians-stranded-algeria-morocco.html)\n56 UNHCR, [UNHCR welcomes admission of Syrians by Morocco, 22 June](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/6/594b8b2d4/unhcr-welcomes-admission-syrians-morocco.html)\n2017.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nTOP FIVE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF ARRIVALS TO SPAIN - JAN TO JUN 2017\n\n\n600\n\n\n\n500\n\n\n400\n\n\n300\n\n\n200\n\n\n100\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGuinea 211 521 263 191 248 320\n\nC\u00f4te d'Ivoire 360 183 223 262 253 383\n\nThe Gambia 202 121 153 115 178 272\n\nMorocco 113 40 125 195 157 513\n\nSyrian Arab Republic 127 118 138 154 144 124\n\n\n\na merchant vessel spotted a boat drifting with the\nbodies of five people in the Alboran Sea. [57] On 1 July,\na further 49 people are thought to have drowned in\nthe worst tragedy of the past decade along routes\nto Spain when their inflatable boat capsized around\nmidnight. Only three survivors were later rescued\nclinging to the boat. [58]\n\nAt the land borders, some can pass undetected\nthrough border crossing points while others take\ntheir chances trying to climb the fences. While\nseveral hundred people were able to cross the\nfences into Ceuta in February, since then fewer than\n70 have entered this way each month. In Melilla,\nnumbers entering the enclave are higher with\nover 400, including 144 Syrians, arriving in May but\n\n\n57 US News, [Spain: 5 Migrants Found Dead in Drifting Boat, 92 More](https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-06-17/spain-5-migrants-found-dead-in-drifting-boat-92-more-saved)\n[Saved, 17 June 2017.](https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-06-17/spain-5-migrants-found-dead-in-drifting-boat-92-more-saved)\n58 UNHCR, [UNHCR dismayed by the worst tragedy of the last decade in](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/notas-de-prensa/2873-unhcr-dismayed-by-the-worst-tragedy-of-the-last-decade-in-the-western-mediterranean-)\n[the Western Mediterranean, 5 July 2017.](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/notas-de-prensa/2873-unhcr-dismayed-by-the-worst-tragedy-of-the-last-decade-in-the-western-mediterranean-)\n\n\nSEA AND LAND ARRIVALS TO SPAIN 2015 - 2017\n\n\n2,500\n\n\n2,000\n\n\n1,500\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n500\n\n\n\ndropping down to 253 in June. UNHCR continued to\nreceive reports of push-backs from both enclaves in\nthe first six months of 2017.\n\nSmugglers have also resorted to using other risky\nmethods to cross the land border. In May, a group\nof 27 men from different Sub-Saharan African\ncountries were detected at the Melilla border\npost in a false compartment in the back of a truck\nwhere they risked suffocation. [59] In mid-June, a car\ncarrying nine persons rammed through the border\ncheckpoint into Melilla, injuring a police officer. [60]\n\n\n59  Europa Press, [Descubren 27 inmigrantes en el doble fondo de un](http://www.europapress.es/ceuta-y-melilla/noticia-descubren-27-inmigrantes-doble-fondo-camion-frontera-melilla-rescatan-polizon-tubo-20170518172753.html)\n[cami\u00f3n en la frontera de Melilla y rescatan a un poliz\u00f3n de un tubo, 18 May](http://www.europapress.es/ceuta-y-melilla/noticia-descubren-27-inmigrantes-doble-fondo-camion-frontera-melilla-rescatan-polizon-tubo-20170518172753.html)\n2017.\n60 EFE, [Car with 9 migrants speeds through border into Melilla, injures 2](https://www.efe.com/efe/english/world/car-with-9-migrants-speeds-through-border-into-melilla-injures-2-officers/50000262-3299046)\n[ofcers, 16 June 2017.](https://www.efe.com/efe/english/world/car-with-9-migrants-speeds-through-border-into-melilla-injures-2-officers/50000262-3299046)\n\n\n\n            \n\nLand 2015 1,276 602 793 1,142 866 932 863 862 1,032 1,079 945 588\n\nLand 2016 483 275 253 446 339 334 317 599 656 851 531 848\n\nLand 2017 331 1,201 355 298 473 325\n\nSea 2015 264 44 280 243 512 414 380 417 621 1,059 557 492\n\nSea 2016 492 222 351 451 575 715 458 934 1,248 1,110 854 752\n\nSea 2017 1,049 535 842 900 835 2,363\n\n\nArrival figures for Spain are provided by Spanish Ministry of Interior and Spanish Police. Figures are subject to future adjustment and should not be considered final.\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### SAFE AND LEGAL PATHWAYS\n\nWhile there has been much effort expended on trying to\nreduce and prevent irregular entries into Europe, insufficient\nsteps have been taken to improve protection conditions and\naccess to solutions where people are as well as to increase\naccess to safe and legal pathways.\n\nMore needs to be done to create increased access to safe and\nlegal pathways for people in need of international protection\nto enter Europe in order to offer a viable alternative to the\ndangerous journeys many undertake. Increasing access\nto safe and legal pathways could not only help to reduce\nthe instances of refugees being confronted with multiple\ndangers, but it can also promote border integrity, enable\nStates to conduct any required background checks, and\nreduce people\u2019s reliance on the use of smugglers.\n\nOver the past year, some progress has been made in expanding\nopportunities for legal pathways with 18,175 persons resettled\nto Europe in 2016, a 63% increase compared to 2015. [61] The\nfive European countries resettling the most refugees in\n2016 were the United Kingdom (5,180 or 29% of all refugees\nresettled to Europe), Norway (3,290 or 18%), Sweden (1,890\nor 10%), France (1,420 or 8%) and Germany (1,240 or 7%).\nHowever, a far more substantial increase is necessary to\npresent real alternatives. For example, 405 Eritrean refugees\nwere resettled in Europe in 2016 but over 20,000 Eritreans\ncrossed the sea from North Africa to Italy that year. [62] UNHCR\nestimates that a significant number of refugees along routes\nused by refugees and migrants to travel to Libya are in need\nof resettlement, including around 263,000 refugees in the\nEast and Horn of Africa, 19,300 refugees in West Africa, and\n18,000 refugees in North Africa. [63]\n\nThe desire to join family already granted protection in Europe,\nalong with the length of family reunification procedures, is\none reason why some travel irregularly to Europe. UNHCR,\nthe Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner, [64] and\nmany others have noted the multiple obstacles that prevent\nrefugees from being able to utilize the channels intended\nfor this, including preventing or delaying beneficiaries\nof subsidiary protection\u2019s access to family reunification,\nthe application of limited definitions of family by some\nStates, and difficulties accessing embassies abroad. As a\npositive step, Germany has increased staff at several of its\nembassies in the Middle East to process family reunification\napplications, though applicants reportedly still face delays\nof many months for an appointment. IOM has also opened\nfour service centres (in Beirut, Istanbul, Gaziantep and Erbil)\nto assist Syrian families applying for German family reunion\nvisas. [65] In Belgium, UNHCR has initiated an information\ncampaign for beneficiaries of international protection on\nfamily reunification [66] while in the United Kingdom and Ireland,\nUNHCR has provided financial support with the travel costs\nof refugees arriving via family reunification via the national\nRed Cross societies.\n\nThere are already a number of innovative programmes that\nhave been developed by European countries in addition to\nthese projects, [67] which demonstrates what is possible within\n\n\n61  UNHCR, [Europe Resettlement 2016, 9 June 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/57367)\n62  According to Eurostat, 92% of Eritreans who applied for asylum in the EU+ region in 2016\nwere granted refugee status or subsidiary protection.\n63  UNHCR, [The Central Mediterranean Route: Working on the Alternatives to Dangerous](http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR%20Central%20Mediterranean%20Route%20SB%20Jan-Dec%202017%20-%2017JUL17.pdf)\n[Journeys 2017, July 2017.](http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR%20Central%20Mediterranean%20Route%20SB%20Jan-Dec%202017%20-%2017JUL17.pdf)\n64 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, [European countries must lift obstacles](http://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/european-countries-must-lift-obstacles-to-reunification-of-refugee-families)\n[to reunifcation of refugee families, 19 June 2017.](http://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/european-countries-must-lift-obstacles-to-reunification-of-refugee-families)\n[65 IOM, IOM\u2019s Family Assistance Programme, 2016; IOM,](http://germany.iom.int/sites/default/files/FAP/FAP_infosheet_ENGLISH_2016.pdf) [Family Assistance Programme Centre](https://www.iom.int/news/family-assistance-programme-centre-opens-erbil-facilitate-family-reunification-germany)\n[Opens in Erbil to Facilitate Family Reunifcation in Germany, 3 March 2017.](https://www.iom.int/news/family-assistance-programme-centre-opens-erbil-facilitate-family-reunification-germany)\n[66 UNHCR, Family reunifcation, July 2017](http://www.unhcr.be/fr/medias/communiques-de-presse/artikel/afc40d3d925ea3b441cfff96d5bdf313/-9cb90c22b8.html)\n[67  For example, please refer to Resettlement and Other Admission Pathways for Syrian](http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/573dc82d4/resettlement-other-admission-pathways-syrian-refugees.html)\n[Refugees, May 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/573dc82d4/resettlement-other-admission-pathways-syrian-refugees.html)\n\n\n\nDESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nthe limits of individual countries legal systems. This includes\nhumanitarian admission programmes, humanitarian visas,\nprivate sponsorship programmes and academic scholarships.\nWhat European States must strive to do is to make such\nprogrammes a more permanent feature of the way in which\nthey provide protection, rather than _ad hoc_ measures in\nresponse to emergency situations.\n\n\nSyrian refugee and former TV chef Mohammad El Khaldy, 36, is reunited with his mother for the first\ntime in four years. Chef Mohammad El Khaldy from Syria lives as a refugee in France and had not seen\nhis mother for more than four years. She has been living in Lebanon, having also fled the war back\nhome. After the nightmare 12-day journey that brought them to Europe on an overcrowded boat from\nEgypt to Italy, Mohammad\u2019s new life in France is better than he could ever have dreamed.\n\n\nOf those already in Europe, in the first six months of 2017,\n10,424 people were relocated from Greece to other EU\nMember States via transfers under the Dublin Regulation and\nthe Emergency Relocation Mechanism, an average of over\n1,700 a month. While as of the end of June only 15,832 asylum\nseekers (24% of the initial target of 66,400 envisaged by the\nend of September 2017) had been relocated from Greece\nunder the Emergency Relocation Mechanism, progress has\nbeen made with over 8,558 people transferred from Greece\nin the first six months of 2017 compared to 7,192 in the whole\nof 2016. [68] In June 2017, there was a record monthly high with\nover 3,000 transfers under the relocation scheme.\n\nIn addition, between January and June this year, Greece\nsubmitted 7,267 requests to other EU Member States to take\nresponsibility for examining an asylum claim in accordance\nwith the Dublin Regulation. Of these, the majority concerned\npersons with family members already granted protection\nin another EU Member State (2,948), or seeking asylum in\nanother EU Member State (2,307), 625 concerned children,\nand 1,076 were submitted on the basis of the \u2018humanitarian\nclause\u2019. [69] However, in the first six months of 2017, only 1,866\ntransfers to another EU Member State took place under the\nDublin Regulation. [70]\n\nAs of the end of June, only 6,792 asylum-seekers have\nbeen relocated from Italy, just 17% of the initial target set for\ncompletion by the end of September 2017, with many of those\narriving by sea in Italy not eligible for the relocation scheme.\n\n\n[68 Greek Asylum Service, Statistical Data of the Greek Asylum Service \u2013 Relocation Proce-](http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Relocation-procedures-up-to-9-07-17_en-.pdf)\n[dures, July 2017.](http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Relocation-procedures-up-to-9-07-17_en-.pdf)\n69  Discretionary clauses allow Member States to assume responsibility for an application\neven though they are not strictly obliged to do so under the Dublin Regulation, for example, on\nhumanitarian grounds.\n[70 Greek Asylum Service, Statistical Data of the Greek Dublin Unit (7.6.2013-30.06.2017), July](http://asylo.gov.gr/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Greek-Dublin-Unit_en.pdf)\n2017.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\nSyrian refugee, Ahmad Mansour, 36, and his wife Sara have found a safe haven in an Austrian village raising not only their own sons, Feras, Nabil and Sohaib, but also two nephews, Abdallah and Mostafa.\nAbdallah and Mostafa\u2019s parents were tragically killed in a bomb attack in Syria. Ahmad and Sara took the boys in and treated them as their own children, but they had no official adoption papers that gave\nthem guardianship. Under Austrian law, only \u2018nuclear\u2019 families (meaning spouses and their children) are eligible for reunification. UNHCR, the Refugee Agency, mediated to find a solution and the nephews\nwere brought to Austria under a resettlement programme. Read the [full story.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2017/4/58e253754/refugees-austria-yearn-loved-ones-behind.html)\n\n##### CONCLUSION\n\nIn the first half of 2017, over 105,000 refugees and migrants entered Europe via the three Mediterranean routes and\nover 2,290 are thought to have died along land and sea routes while undertaking the dangerous journeys usually\nnecessary to cross borders. For those crossing to Europe via the central Mediterranean, greater regional support\nfor Italy is required, as well as increased efforts to address the root causes of movement via Libya, provide support\nfor countries receiving and hosting refugees and transit countries, renew efforts to find solutions and protection for\nrefugees before they reach Libya, and take steps to address smuggling and trafficking. [71] In July, UNHCR launched\nan appeal to help provide meaningful alternatives to refugees and others undertaking dangerous journeys to\nEurope. [72] These include scaling-up existing activities or implementing new ones to provide effective ways and\nmeans to protect refugees and asylum-seekers along the various routes leading to Libya.\n\nWhile European leaders discuss responses to the current situation, more concerted efforts are needed as part of\na regional response. With so many lives at stake, UNHCR stresses the vital importance of rescue at sea operations\nundertaken by all actors involved. Further work is needed to remove obstacles to existing legal pathways, including\nfamily reunification. Greater numbers of legal pathways would offer a feasible alternative to irregular journeys for\na larger number of people, something that currently makes more people reliant on smugglers and undermines\nanti-smuggling initiatives. While some progress has been reported with some States taking steps to investigate\nallegations of human rights abuses at borders, further measures are required to address the continued reports of\nsuch practices in some countries in the region.\n\nFor those already in Europe, more needs to be done to strengthen access to asylum procedures and effective\nprotection where people are to prevent dangerous onward journeys. In addition, further steps are needed to\nstrengthen identification and assistance for unaccompanied and separated children including improving\nregistration, age assessments and guardianship systems, access to legal representation, as well as broader care\narrangements. [73] Within the European Union it is also necessary to speed up and extend the emergency relocation\nscheme as well as ensure timely family reunion and implementation of the humanitarian and discretionary clauses\nwithin the Dublin regulation.\n\n\n71 UNHCR, [High Commissioner Grandi urges more solidarity with Italy, 1 July 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/7/5957c2304/high-commissioner-grandi-urges-solidarity-italy.html)\n72 UNHCR, [UNHCR seeks support for alternatives to dangerous refugee journeys, 18 July 2017.](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/7/596db7284/unhcr-seeks-support-alternatives-dangerous-refugee-journeys.html)\n[73 UNHCR, UNICEF and IRC, The Way Forward to Strengthened Policies and Practices for Unaccompanied and Separated Children in Europe, July 2017.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/58434#_ga=2.257171531.1307270767.1501506167-545518822.1500188955)\n\n\nUNHCR / August 2017 1 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/12f358f1-865f-3c71-b923-7aab9d0577a1/58838.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_113/raw/doc_113_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,556 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# AFRICA Fact Sheet \u2013 June 2002\n\n**UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES**\n\n#### **INTRODUCTION**\n\n_On 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002, there were 4.2 million people of concern to UNHCR in Africa out_\n_of about 20 million world-wide. The Africa figure included 3.3 million refugees,_\n_500,000 internally displaced or recently returned displaced people and 267,000_\n_former refugees who recently returned home. In comparison, in January 2001, the_\n_global number of people of concern to UNHCR was 22 million, of whom 5.3 million_\n_were in Africa. Of these, some 3.6 million were refugees._\n\n_During 2001, more than 210,000 new refugees sought asylum in various countries in_\n_Africa. During the same period, 266,788 refugees returned home, mainly to Sierra_\n_Leone, Somalia, Eritrea, Rwanda and Ethiopia. This return figure represents 57.6_\n_percent of world-wide refugee returns in 2001._\n\n**Among the 10 largest UNHCR-assisted return movements in the world, 6 were to**\n**African countries**\n_(Statistics as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002)_\n\nThese were:\n\nSierra Leone 92,300 Afghanistan 26,000\nFYR Macedonia 90,000 Yugoslavia 22,100\nSomalia 50,200 Rwanda 21,500\nEritrea 32,700 East Timor 18,200\nBurundi 27,600 Angola 13,000\n\n\n**Ten largest refugee groups in Africa** ( _Statistics as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002_ )\n\nBurundi 553,900\nSudan 489,300\nAngola 470,500 Eritrea 333,100\nSomalia 440,200 Liberia 244,600\nDR Congo 391,800 Sierra Leone 179,000\n\nRwanda 105,700\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.6997888684272766,
-          "start": 215,
-          "end": 216
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "African countries",
-          "confidence": 0.6195316910743713,
-          "start": 209,
-          "end": 211
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.6782885789871216,
-          "start": 225,
-          "end": 226
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8635479211807251,
-          "start": 156,
-          "end": 157
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Ethiopia 58,900\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **I. West and Central Africa**\n\nAt the beginning of 2002, there were 890,000 people of concern to UNHCR in 19\ncountries of West and Central Africa. Half of these were refugees, mainly from Liberia\n(226,747), Sierra Leone (165,769), Sudan (48,903) and Chad (39,289). Roughly a quarter\nwere returnees to Sierra Leone from neighbouring countries (162,319). Despite significant\nreturn movements to Sierra Leone, Guinea still had the largest refugee population in the\nregion (178,444).\n\n**Refugee Population in main refugee-hosting countries of West and Central Africa**\n( _Statistics as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002, by country of asylum, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\n\n\nGuinea 178,444\nIvory Coast 126,239\nLiberia 54,760\nCentral African Republic 49,239\nCameroon 41,186\n\n\n\nGuinea 178,444 Senegal 20,707\nIvory Coast 126,239 Gabon 15,581\nLiberia 54,760 Chad 12,950\nCentral African Republic 49,239 Togo 12,257\nCameroon 41,186 Ghana 11,792\n\n\nSIERRA LEONE emerged from 10-years of civil war this year, raising hopes for the return\nof hundreds of thousands of people uprooted by the conflict. The end of hostilities officially\nannounced last January paved the way for a disarming of the RUF rebel force. Much of the\narea previously controlled by RUF was now open to return. The victory of moderate\npolitical forces in parliamentary and presidential election last May appeared to further\nstabilise the situation in the war-ravaged country. Ahead of the May poll, UNHCR reached\nan agreement with the government authorities to allow late registration for returning refugees\nto enable them to vote.\n\n_**Refugees from Sierra Leone**_ :\nSierra Leonean refugees in West and Central Africa (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics as at April 2002, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nGuinea 83,130 Nigeria 2,041\nLiberia 37,724 Mali 1,436\nGambia 7,630 Guinea Bissau 318\nGhana 1,998 Senegal 219\n\n\n\nGuinea 83,130 Nigeria 2,041\nLiberia 37,724 Mali 1,436\nGambia 7,630 Guinea Bissau 318\nGhana 1,998 Senegal 219\n\nC\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire 2,116 Other countries 38\n\nBy April of 2002 and estimated 162,000 refugees had gone back to Sierra :Leone, mainly\nfrom Guinea and Liberia. 90,000 of them went with UNHCR\u2019s help by boat, by road and\nby air. Those who walked back received aid upon arrival. The remaining 70,000, went back\nspontaneously.\n\nOpening of overland routes into Sierra Leone through Kambia (Guinea) enabled UNHCR\nto increase the pace of repatriation to 1,500 refugees per week. In February this year,\nUNHCR also began facilitating the return of Sierra Leonean refugees from Liberia, helping\nanother 10,000 Sierra Leonean refugees get home. By May 2002, some 51,000 returnees\nwere back in their areas of origin, whereas approximately 25,000 were still in transit. By the\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "end of the year, UNHCR will facilitate the return of 40,000 additional Sierra Leonean\nrefugees from Guinea and 15,000 from Liberia.\n\nLIBERIA: While peace took hold in Sierra Leone, neighbouring Liberia remained in turmoil,\njeopardising the stability of the entire region. Intensifying fighting between government forces\nand rebels in northern and eastern districts of Liberia uprooted 50,000 people within and\ndrove thousands more into neighbouring Sierra Leone, Guinea, C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire and Ghana.\nDuring the first quarter of 2002, over 14,000 **Liberian** **refugees** fled to eastern Sierra\nLeone. Another 4,800 entered Guinea, 3,500 fled to C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire and 1,800 turned up in\nGhana. UNHCR rushed to move those arriving in Sierra Leone and Guinea away from\nvolatile border areas.\n\n_**Refugees from Liberia**_ :\nLiberian refugees in West and Central Africa (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics as at April 2002, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nC\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire 126,391 Mali 381\nGuinea 87,025 Senegal 227\nSierra Leone 24,512 Gambia 130\nGhana 10,725 Guinea Bissau 28\nNigeria 1,505 Other countries 67\n\n\nUNHCR has opened a total of eight offices in Sierra Leone to assist with the re-integration\nof returnees and also to deal with the influx of new Liberian refugees. The six main offices\nare in Bo, Kenema, Kailahun, Zimmi and Koidu, in the east of Sierra Leone, and Kambia in\nthe west. UNHCR also has satellite offices in Lungi and Daru. In Sierra Leone, UNHCR\nmanages a refugee camp for Liberians, three transit centres near Freetown, four temporary\nsettlements and two host community projects.\n\nREGIONAL: As of mid-April 2002, there were an estimated 165,769 **Sierra Leonean**\n**refugees** and 226,747 **Liberian refugees** in various countries of West and Central Africa.\n\nBudgetary constraints and the termination of some programmes led to the closure of, eight\nUNHCR country offices in 2001. The closed offices were in Burkina Faso, Cameroon,\nChad, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Niger, Mali, Mauritania and Togo. Programmes in these\ncountries, with small caseloads of urban and camp-based refugees, are covered by the\nclosest geographical UNHCR office. This year, UNHCR plans to reopen the offices in\nCameroon and Gambia.\n\n### **II. Southern Africa**\n\nAt the beginning of 2002, there were 602,300 people of concern in 14 countries of southern\nAfrica ( _not_ including Tanzania or the DRC). Of these, some 371,000 were refugees, mainly\nfrom Angola (255,217) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (78,901). Another 200,000\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "were internally displaced persons assisted by UNHCR in Angola. Zambia had the largest\nrefugee population in the region (281,766), mainly from Angola and the DRC.\n\n**Refugee Population in main refugee-hosting countries of Southern Africa**\n( _Statistics as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002, by country of asylum, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nZambia 281,766 Malawi 6,841\nNamibia 32,424 Mozambique 5,391\nSouth Africa 18,672 Botswana 4,239\nAngola 12,250 Swaziland 1,051\nZimbabwe 8,706\n\n\nANGOLA: The death last February of Angola\u2019s hard-line UNITA rebel leader Jonas\nSavimbi and the subsequent peace deal between the rebels and the government has raised\nhopes for an end to a civil war which had raged in Angola since it won independence from\nPortugal in 1975. Fighting between the ruling Popular Movement for the Liberation of\nAngola (MPLA) and the rebel UNITA - bitter rivals even before independence \u2013 had\ndevastated the country. Angola\u2019s people today are among the poorest in the world despite\nthe country\u2019s vast natural resources. The war has killed hundreds of thousands of people,\ndisplaced an estimated four million inside the country and sent some 450,000 into\nneighbouring countries. Large numbers have also been maimed by landmines, which litter\nvast areas of the country. Savimbi\u2019s death and the new peace effort have created prospects\nfor the return of 450,000 Angolan refugees scattered in neighbouring countries.\n\n_**Refugees from Angola**_ : _(see also section on Great Lakes)_\nAngolan refugees in southern Africa and the Great Lakes (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics as at January 2002, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nZambia 218,540\nDRC 186,975\nNamibia 30,599\nRoC 15,300\nSouth Africa 7,207*\n\n_*includes asylum seekers_\n\nBotswana 898\nZimbabwe 226\nSwaziland 140\nMozambique 56\nMalawi 1\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.5462521910667419,
-          "start": 319,
-          "end": 320
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.6113620400428772,
-          "start": 319,
-          "end": 320
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5065613389015198,
-          "start": 330,
-          "end": 331
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "southern Africa and the Great Lakes",
-          "confidence": 0.5017640590667725,
-          "start": 304,
-          "end": 310
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.6650168895721436,
-          "start": 323,
-          "end": 324
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Angolan refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.6151142120361328,
-          "start": 301,
-          "end": 303
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR will in 2002 gradually phase out its programme for 250,000 **internally displaced**\n**people** (IDPs) in Angola\u2019s Za\u00efre and Uige provinces. Funds remaining from 2001 will be\nused this year to focus on human rights training and refugee protection issues. Since\nUNHCR began its involvement with Angolan IDPs in June 2000, it has been able to\nimplement a number of projects. They include construction of health clinics and schools, the\nimprovement of access to clean water, as well as educational and agricultural projects.\nUNHCR will keep looking after some 12,250 Congolese (DRC) refugees in a refugee camp\noutside Luanda.,\n\n**Namibia** is still a major destination for Angolan refugees. The country\u2019s refugee population\njumped to 32,424 at the end of 2001, or a 17% increase over the previous year\u2019s 27,740\nfigure, and 86% increase over two years (17,353 at the end of 1999).\n\nThe staffing of UNHCR\u2019s office in Namibia was enhanced to efficiently respond to the\ncontinuing arrivals of Angolan refugees. UNHCR has obtained the right to sit on screening\ntribunals for illegal entrants and managed to have several hundred Angolans recognised as\nrefugees and thus saved from deportation.. The agency is concerned that many more\ngenuine asylum seekers may be summarily sent back to Angola as illegal immigrants.\n\nZAMBIA: Last March **Zambia**, hosted 237,238 Angolan refugees, up from around\n200,000 a year before. Struggling to cope with the region\u2019s largest Angolan refugee\npopulation, Zambia has urged the donor community to ensure that programmes designed to\nmeet refugees\u2019 humanitarian needs also take into account the needs of the host community.\nThe Zambian government has also taken steps towards the naturalisation and local\nsettlement of refugees, especially Angolans who have been in the country for several\ndecades.\n\n**Congolese (DRC)** are the other large refugee population hosted by Zambia. By the end of\nMarch 2002, there were 52,274 Congolese (DRC) refugees in Zambia. The average arrival\nrate into Zambia stood at 1,500 refugees per month throughout the year.\n\n**South Africa** received new asylum seekers from other African countries, as well as\ncountries as far afield as Bangladesh, Bulgaria, China, India and Pakistan.. At the end of\n2001, official asylum statistics showed that South Africa had received 66,205 asylum\napplications since mid-1994. UNHCR is assisting the government in dealing with asylum\nprocedures, attending hearings and advising the authorities on individual cases. Out of the\n66,205 applications received, 18,672 have been accepted and 36,913 have been rejected.\nThe remaining cases are still pending.\n\nThe world\u2019s attention this year focused on **Zimbabwe**, which held its presidential elections\nlast March amid reports of intimidation of opposition groups. But the re-election of\nPresident Robert Mugabe, widely criticised by the West, did not cause any significant\ndisplacement across Zimbabwe\u2019s orders.\n\n**Malawi, Mozambique** **and Zimbabwe** received a steady trickle of new asylum seekers,\nmainly from the DRC, Rwanda and Burundi. As of December 2001, Zimbabwe had\nrecorded a sharp increase in refugee arrivals with 8,706 refugees, compared to 4,127 a year\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "before. Malawi\u2019s refugee population stood at 6,841, as compared to 3,900 at the end of\n2000. Mozambique\u2019s refugee population more than doubled to 5,391. Many of the\nregistered Rwandan refugees in Southern Africa have been on the move since the 1994\ngenocide and have circulated through DRC, Burundi and Tanzania before reaching the\nsouthern parts of the continent.\n\nOn the whole, Southern Africa\u2019s refugee population continued increasing over 2001. At the\nend of the year, it had reached 371,401, or a 15% increase over a year. The bulk of the\nregion\u2019s \u201cnew\u201d refugees came from Angola and the DRC, Rwanda and Somalia.\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "registered Rwandan refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.7480301856994629,
-          "start": 41,
-          "end": 44
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Southern Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.9480695128440857,
-          "start": 45,
-          "end": 47
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "1994",
-          "confidence": 0.7030943036079407,
-          "start": 54,
-          "end": 55
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rwandan refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.7403702139854431,
-          "start": 42,
-          "end": 44
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **III. East and Horn of Africa**\n\n**Refugee Population in East and Horn of Africa**\n( _Statistics are as at 1st January 2002, by country of asylum, including refugees not assisted by_\n_UNHCR_ )\n\nSudan 349,209 Djibouti 23,176\nKenya 239,221 Eritrea 2,272\nUganda 199,736 Somalia 589\nEthiopia 152,554\n\n\nAt the beginning of 2002, the East and Horn of Africa region was host to nearly one million\nrefugees in seven countries of the region. These were refugees mainly from Sudan\n(397,885), Eritrea (324,546) and Somalia (233,190). The vast majority of them have lived\nin exile for more than a decade, some even longer. Sudan was hosting the largest number of\nrefugees in the region but was at the same time the country of origin for the largest number of\nrefugees in the region.\n\n_**Refugees from Sudan**_ :\nSudanese refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at 1st January 2002 and include countries outside the East and Horn of Africa_\n_region. Statistics also include refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nUganda 176,766 Kenya 69,804\nEthiopia 80,934 Central African Republic 36,345\nDem. Rep. of Congo 75,009 Chad 12,558\n\n\nThe 18-year-old civil war, which pits the mainly Arab north against the largely-black\nChristian south, continued unabated. Apart from an 11-year period of peace during the\n1970s and early 80s, the country has been torn by civil war since independence in 1956.\nThe northern government continues to fight southern rebel forces that demand a degree of\nautonomy from the north and the removal of Islamic _Sharia_ law. Large swathes of territory\nin the south remain under rebel control. Sizeable reserves of oil in the south and the\ncountry\u2019s entry into the oil market in 1999 introduced another spark in the already volatile\npolitical arena. Meanwhile, the long years of war have killed an estimated two million\npeople, displaced some four million others internally and sent over 400,000 others in search\nof asylum in neighbouring countries such as Uganda, Ethiopia and Kenya. (Sudanese\nrefugees have also sought refuge in countries such as Chad, Congo (DRC) and Central\nAfrican Republic.)\n\nLittle progress has been made in resolving the civil war. Attacks on villages in the south of\nthe country continued to provoke regular movements of refugees into neighbouring Uganda,\nEthiopia and Kenya. During 2001, some 35,752 Sudanese refugees sought asylum in these\ncountries, bringing the total number of Sudanese refugees in the region to 397,885. During\nthe same year, some 206 Sudanese refugees returned home. UNHCR has continued to\nseek alternative solutions to the protracted Sudanese refugee situation. Due to on-going civil\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Refugee Population in East and Horn of Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.6506576538085938,
-          "start": 16,
-          "end": 24
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "East and Horn of Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.9073346257209778,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 12
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.8732942938804626,
-          "start": 33,
-          "end": 34
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.6201335191726685,
-          "start": 33,
-          "end": 34
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Sudanese refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.767426073551178,
-          "start": 186,
-          "end": 188
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.914901077747345,
-          "start": 197,
-          "end": 198
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.6585136651992798,
-          "start": 203,
-          "end": 204
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Sudanese refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.879243791103363,
-          "start": 186,
-          "end": 188
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "strife, the prospect of repatriation has remained slim while opportunities for local integration\nin many countries of asylum have proven to be remote.\n\n1n 1999, the US government agreed to resettle more than 3,400 unaccompanied Sudanese\nyouths, commonly known as the \u201cLost Boys\u201d, many of whom had been living in Kakuma\ncamp, Kenya since 1992. By the end of 2001, a large majority of the youth had left for\nUSA. The rest of them were expected to depart during the first quarter of 2002.\n\nThere is growing concern that some 200 unaccompanied girls who were part of the group of\nunaccompanied minors who had arrived in Kenya in mid-1992 have been forgotten in the\nsearch for durable solutions. Many are living with foster families in Kakuma camp.\n\n_**Refugees from Eritrea**_ :\nEritrean refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum )\n\n_(Statistics are as at 1st January 2002 and include refugees who are not assisted by UNHCR_ )\n\nSudan 324,546\n\n_* There are also small numbers of Eritrean refugees in Ethiopia and Yemen._\n\nThe first Eritrean refugees fled to neighbouring Sudan in 1967 in the wake of Eritrea\u2019s war\nof independence from Ethiopia. The conflict lasted more than 20 years and displaced more\nthan 500,000 people. It ended in 1991 and Eritrea attained independence two years later.\nIn May 2000, a two-month border conflict between the two countries sent another wave of\nnearly 100,000 refugees fleeing into Sudan. This new conflict forced the suspension of a\nrefugee return programme that was started in 1995. The operation, which was resumed\nduring the second half of 2000, has transported home more than 100,000 Eritrean refugees.\nMore than 324,000 others remain in exile in Sudan.\n\nSignificant progress was made towards the resolution of the border conflict and resulting\ntension between Eritrea and Ethiopia. In this regard, the international boundary commission\nappointed to demarcate the border under dispute gave its ruling in mid-April 2002. Both\ncountries agreed to accept the commission\u2019s decision. This development is expected to\ninspire more confidence among the over 324,000 Eritrean refugees in neighbouring Sudan to\nreturn home. A major information campaign for return was carried out in May in the refugee\ncamps. UNHCR aims to assist the return of some 60,000 Eritrean refugees before the end\nof December 2002 and an equal number during 2003. By the end of April 2002, the return\noperation, which was launched in May 2001 in Sudan, had seen the repatriation of some\n44,399 Eritrean refugees. The majority of them returned to Eritrea\u2019s Gash Barka region,\nwhich is expected to receive the largest number of returnees. UNHCR is working with the\ngovernment of Eritrea and other development partners to ensure that communities in\nreturnees\u2019 areas of origin are able to re-integrate them effectively. In this regard, UNHCR\nhas signed a letter of understanding with UNICEF and UNDP for specific re-integration\nprojects.\n\nUNHCR announced on May 8 that it is ending refugee status for all Eritreans who fled their\ncountry as a result of the war of independence or the recent border conflict between\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.8534939289093018,
-          "start": 164,
-          "end": 165
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Sudan",
-          "confidence": 0.6544004082679749,
-          "start": 181,
-          "end": 182
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "1st January 2002",
-          "confidence": 0.5135632157325745,
-          "start": 168,
-          "end": 171
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Eritrean refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9700800180435181,
-          "start": 153,
-          "end": 155
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Ethiopia and Eritrea. The world-wide cessation will take effect on December 31, 2002 and\nwill affect hundreds of thousands of Eriteans in neighbouring countries. More than 100,000\nEritreans have already gone home, either on their own or under the voluntary repatriation\noperation. That program will continue. In addition, the agency will assess the claims of those\nindividuals who come forward to seek continued asylum beyond 2002. Those found to be\nstill in need of international protection will be able to remain in their current host country as\nrefugees. Those who do not qualify for asylum after 2002 but do not wish to return home\nbecause of strong family, social or economic links with the host country will be expected to\nlegalise their stay there.\n\n_**Refugees from Somalia**_ _:_\nSomali refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR_ )\n\nKenya 144,349 Djibouti 21,712\nYemen 67,485 South Africa 5,336\nEthiopia 67,129\n\n\nThe third major group of refugees hosted by countries in the East and Horn of Africa region\nare Somalis. The first group fled their country in 1988 when north-west Somalia, also\nknown as Somaliland, began a struggle to break away from the rest of the country. This war\nof secession caused displacement mainly into eastern Ethiopia. Hundreds of thousands more\nSomali refugees fled their country in 1991 after the fall of the Siad Barre regime and the\nsubsequent outbreak of civil war. At the peak of the crisis in Somalia in 1992, there were\nnearly 700,000 Somali refugees in countries of the East and Horn of Africa region. Since\nthen, nearly 500,000 have returned to their homeland while more than 30,000 others have\nbeen resettled to third countries such as USA, Canada, Australia and several European\ncountries.\n\nIn Somalia, the establishment of a transitional national government and the election of a\nPresident in Somalia in 2000 have failed to consolidate peace. The country continues to be\nruled by local chieftains and traditional warlords, while regional administrations continue to\njostle for greater power and authority. Humanitarian access to many parts of the country has\nremained extremely limited due to security concerns while a combination of drought,\npoverty, conflict and violence continues to threaten millions of Somalis _._\n\nIn mid-April 2002, for example, inter-clan warfare in and around the town of Bula Hawa in\nthe Upper Gedo region of south-west Somalia, displaced some 6,000 Somalis into the\nnearby Kenyan town of Mandera, which borders both Ethiopia and Somalia. By early May,\nthe continued fighting had forced more people to flee into the remote Kenyan border town,\nbringing the estimated number of displaced in the town to some 10,000. Bula Hawa on the\nSomalia side of the border was reported to be empty of civilians. By mid-May, UNHCR\nemergency teams were working with the Government of Kenya to deliver humanitarian\nassistance to the refugees and planning on a possible transfer of the refugees to existing\nrefugee camps in Kenya.\n\n\n10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.7812799215316772,
-          "start": 160,
-          "end": 161
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "East and Horn of Africa region",
-          "confidence": 0.7418380379676819,
-          "start": 212,
-          "end": 218
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.8082294464111328,
-          "start": 171,
-          "end": 172
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.529930055141449,
-          "start": 150,
-          "end": 151
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR has maintained a policy of promoting voluntary repatriation to areas of relative\npeace and stability in Somalia while facilitating return to crisis areas only upon the specific\nrequest of refugees who choose to return on an informed basis. During 2001, some 50,216\nSomali refugees mainly from camps in Ethiopia returned to north-west Somalia, enabling the\nclosure of three of eight camps for Somali refugees in the north-east of the country. Between\n1997 and the end of 2001, a total of 175,512 refugees from Ethiopia were assisted to return\nhome to north-west Somalia while another 11,743 Ethiopian nationals of Somali origin who\nhad mingled with refugees and were residing in the refugee camps were dispersed back into\nthe local communities. During 2002, UNHCR expects to assist the return of a further\n50,000 refugees and close two more camps in eastern Ethiopia. An estimated 15,000\nrefugees who are from Somalia\u2019s Juba region are expected to remain in camps in Ethiopia\nuntil conditions in that part of the country become conducive for return. The majority of\nSomali refugees in Kenya are also from the Juba region and are as yet unable to go home.\n\n_**Refugees from Ethiopia**_ _:_\nEthiopian refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at 1st January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nKenya 13,541 Sudan 16,120\n\nIn March 2000, UNHCR announced the cessation of refugee status for Ethiopian refugees\nwho had fled the country prior to 1991. Ethiopian refugees in all countries of asylum worldwide were affected by this decision. The largest number of this group of refugees was in\nSudan, with 12,000 living in camps. It was estimated that twice as many were in urban\ncentres. Kenya had over 3,500 Ethiopians belonging to this group residing in urban areas.\nBecause of a border conflict between Eritrean and Ethiopia, the implementation of cessation\nof status was delayed in Sudan. Between December 2000 and March 2001, UNHCR was\nable to assist the return of more than 10,000 Ethiopian refugees affected by the decision.\nRefugees who opted to remain in Sudan or Kenya were advised to approach governments\nin their countries of asylum to authorise their continued stay in those countries through\nregular immigration channels or to have their claim for continued asylum assessed. Between\n1993 and 1998, more than 70,000 Ethiopian refugees in Sudan and some 50,000 in Kenya\nwere assisted to return home. Nearly 30,000 Ethiopian refugees remain in the Horn of\nAfrica region. Political tensions in Ethiopia during 2001 provoked small-scale movements of\nEthiopian refugees, mainly students, to neighbouring countries.\n\n### **IV. The Great Lakes region**\n\n**Refugee Population in the Great Lakes region**\n_(Statistics as at 1st January 2002, by country of asylum, including refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nUnited. Rep of Tanzania 668,082 Rwanda 34,267\nDem. Rep. of Congo 362,012 Burundi 27,896\nRepublic of Congo 110,724\n\n\n11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Refugee Population in the Great Lakes region",
-          "confidence": 0.5673021078109741,
-          "start": 511,
-          "end": 518
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Great Lakes region",
-          "confidence": 0.7531899213790894,
-          "start": 504,
-          "end": 507
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.6851118206977844,
-          "start": 527,
-          "end": 528
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Ethiopian refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8138700127601624,
-          "start": 466,
-          "end": 468
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "At the beginning of 2002, there were more than 1.2 million refugees in five countries of the\nGreat Lakes region. (United Republic of Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Republic of Congo\nand Democratic Republic of Congo ). These were mainly refugees from Burundi, the\nDemocratic Republic of Congo, Angola, Sudan and Rwanda. Tanzania had the largest\nrefugee population in the whole of Africa (668,082, of whom 498,082 were assisted by\nUNHCR). The largest group of refugees in the Great Lakes region was from Burundi. At\nthe start of 2002, they were also the second largest refugee group in the world cared for by\nUNHCR.\n\n_**Refugees from Burundi**_ _:_\nBurundi refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at 1st January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR_ )\nUnited. Rep. of Tanzania 521,180\nDem. Rep. of Congo 19,485\n\nSince independence in 1961, Burundi has been rocked by tension between the dominant\nTutsi minority and the Hutu majority. A power-struggle between the two ethnic groups is at\nthe root of the long years of incessant conflict that has killed hundreds of thousands of\npeople and displaced nearly one million others both inside and outside the country. A peace\naccord reached in 2000 between the government and several Hutu rebel groups at the\nArusha Peace Talks has resulted in a fragile agreement on power sharing but not a ceasefire. Villages and internally displaced people\u2019s settlements in many parts of the country\ncontinue to come under attack by armed factions who often kill, loot and pillage.\n\nDuring 2001, some 15,000 refugees from Burundi sought asylum mainly in Tanzania,\ncompared to 80,000 in 2000. Because of continuing civil and political unrest in the country,\nUNHCR did not encourage voluntary return. However, the refugee agency assisted more\nthan 2,000 refugees to return. Several thousand others returned home on their own.\n\nSince the installation of a transitional government in November 2001, an increasing number\nof spontaneous returns from camps in western Tanzania have been noted. At the beginning\nof 2002, an agreement was reached by the Tripartite Commission on Repatriation that\nspontaneous returns would be facilitated to reduce the incidence of assault and harassment\nof spontaneous returnees on their way home. The Tripartite Commission on Repatriation\nconsists of representatives from the governments of Burundi, Tanzania and UNHCR. During\nthe second half of March, UNHCR began providing transportation through twice-weekly\nconvoys to Burundi\u2019s northern province of Muyinga. At the beginning of April, after a month\nof partially assisted return, UNHCR had aided the return of more than 4,000 Burundian\nreturnees. Another 55,000 had registered to repatriate. UNHCR is reviewing requests for\nfacilitated return to other parts of the country amid continuing concerns about security.\n\n_**Refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo:**_\nCongolese (DRC) refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n\n_(Statistics are as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR_ )\n\nUN. Rep. of Tanzania 117,516 Republic of Congo 84,306\n\n12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.5530174374580383,
-          "start": 149,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6740045547485352,
-          "start": 87,
-          "end": 88
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.8702102899551392,
-          "start": 4,
-          "end": 5
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.5035196542739868,
-          "start": 4,
-          "end": 5
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.5197187662124634,
-          "start": 47,
-          "end": 48
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Zambia 56,132 Angola 11,933\nRwanda 33,063 Central African Republic 10,225\nBurundi 26,670 Uganda 7,613\n\n\nAt the end of 2001, there were 261,555 Congolese DRC refugees in all countries of the\nGreat Lakes region as well as in Uganda, Central African Republic, Zambia and Angola,\nwhere there were another 85,903, bringing the total number of DRC refugees to 347,458.\nMany fled the conflict which erupted following Laurent Kabila\u2019s ascension to power in\n1998/99 and the subsequent occupation of parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo by\nrebel groups and some neighbouring states such as Uganda and Rwanda. Renewed conflict\nbetween Congolese government forces and the rebel group, Mouvement pour la Liberation\ndu Congo (MLC) led by Jean Pierre Bemba, in 2000 sent another wave of nearly 100,000\nDRC refugees into neighbouring Republic of Congo and Central African Republic.\n\nReturn possibilities for the nearly 350,000 DRC refugees have been uncertain as most\nreturnee areas of origin have remained under rebel control. For example, many of the\n30,000 Banyamulenge and Banyamasisi refugees who fled from areas north of Goma to\nRwanda and the over 100,000 other DRC refugees in Tanzania are from areas of eastern\nDRC which are largely controlled by the RCD-Goma. In addition, more than 100,000\nothers in the Republic of Congo and Central African Republic are from Equateur province,\nmost of which is held by the MLC.\n\nThere is equal concern for an estimated 1.8 million internally displaced Congolese who are\nalso unable to regain their homes due to the prevailing uncertain and insecure conditions in\nthe DRC. Many are reported to be living in extreme poverty with little or no access to food\nand health care. Humanitarian organisations estimate that nearly two million people in the\nDRC have died from malnutrition and disease over the last 4 \u2013 5 years, a figure that is far\nlarger than those who have died in the country\u2019s conflict.\n\nPeace talks \u2013 the Inter-Congolese Dialogue \u2013 held in Sun City, South Africa in March 2002\nbrought together, for the first time in many months, the major protagonists in Congo\u2019s war.\nHopes for a positive outcome of the talks dimmed significantly as agreements reached at the\nseven-week meeting were not acceptable to all parties. The political stalemate continues to\nleave the future of more than 350,000 DRC refugees in the balance.\n\n_**Refugees from the Central African Republic**_ :\nDuring the first quarter of 2002, there were an estimated 5,000 refugees from the Central\nAfrican Republic in the north-west DRC town of Zongo and surrounding areas. The\nrefugees are part of a group of more than 26,000 who fled a failed coup attempt in the\nCentral African Republic in May 2001. At the height of the influx in June 2001, several\nthousand refugees, including former combatants, flocked into the small Congolese town and\nadjacent villages occupying schools and other public buildings. The area is under the control\nof the rebel group \u2013 Movement pour la Liberation du Congo (MLC), led by Jean-Pierre\nBemba.\n\n\n13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "In mid-February, UNHCR completed the transfer of nearly 3,000 of the refugees from the\nnorth-western DRC town of Zongo, on the banks of the Oubangui river, to Mole, a new site\ndeveloped by the refugee agency some 45 km inland. The relocation is in accordance with\nthe 1951 and OAU refugee conventions which require that refugee camps be situated at a\nreasonable distance away from the frontier so as to ensure the physical protection of\nrefugees.\n\nBefore the start of the operation to move civilian refugees from Zongo to Mole, UNHCR\nsought the help of MONUC \u2013 the UN peace-keeping force in Congo - and local authorities\nto separate ex-combatants from the refugees so as to ensure the civilian character of the\ncamp. As a result, more than 1,000 former combatants were transferred from Zongo to\nBokilio, more than 100 km away, paving the way for the transfer of Central African\nrefugees to Mole. Over the last few months, several thousand refugees have returned to the\nCAR capital and outlying regions. An estimated 2,000 others remain scattered across\nseveral villages on the DRC side of the Oubangui river.\n\n_**Refugees from Angola**_ : ( _see also section on Southern Africa)_\nAngolan refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at 1_ _[st]_ _January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR.)_\n\nZambia 218,540 Namibia 30,599\nDem. Rep. of Congo 186,975 Republic of Congo 15,300\n\n\n\nZambia 218,540 Namibia 30,599\nDem. Rep. of Congo 186,975 Republic of Congo 15,300\n\n\n_**Refugees from Rwanda:**_\nRwandan refugees (Breakdown by country of asylum)\n_(Statistics are as at Ist January 2002 and include refugees not assisted by UNHCR)_\n\nDem. Rep. of Congo 30,414 Republic of Congo 6,688\nUn. Rep. of Tanzania 24,241 Zambia 5,048\nUganda 14,288\n\n\n\nRepublic of Congo 6,688\nZambia 5,048\n\n\n\nRwanda is still recovering from the 1994 genocide which saw the killing of more than\n800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus and the displacement of more than 2.5 million Hutu\nrefugees in Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Long years of ethnic\ntension and violence between the dominant Tutsi minority and the majority Hutus came to a\nhead in April 1994 with the shooting down of the plane carrying Rwanda\u2019s President\nJuvenal Habyarimana near the capital, Kigali, in what seemed to have been a wellorchestrated attempt to eliminate the Tutsi. An earlier conflict in 1959 had driven out more\nthan 200,000 Tutsis mainly to neighbouring Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya.\n\nWhile large numbers of Rwandan refugees have returned home from Tanzania and the DRC,\nan estimated 75,000 remain in countries of the Great Lakes region. During 2001, more than\n21,000 refugees returned home mainly from western Tanzania and eastern DRC while some\n6,459 new refugees sought asylum in Uganda and Tanzania.\n\nThe government of Rwanda is making efforts to encourage the return of the remaining\nRwandan refugees in the region. In this regard, the government has taken steps to reach\n\n\n14\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.6275550723075867,
-          "start": 239,
-          "end": 240
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rwandan refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8762127161026001,
-          "start": 317,
-          "end": 319
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.8066473603248596,
-          "start": 328,
-          "end": 329
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6449305415153503,
-          "start": 341,
-          "end": 342
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Republic of Congo",
-          "confidence": 0.5527593493461609,
-          "start": 301,
-          "end": 304
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2002",
-          "confidence": 0.7026024460792542,
-          "start": 334,
-          "end": 335
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rwandan refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9238269925117493,
-          "start": 317,
-          "end": 319
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "tripartite agreements between Rwandan authorities, UNHCR and relevant governments in\nthe East and Central African region.\n\nUNHCR\n**Public Information Section**\nP.O. Box 2500\n1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland\n\nTel: (41 22) 739 85 02\nFax: (41 22) 739 73 14\nE-mail: hqpi00@unhcr.ch\n\n\n15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/471decc6-7111-3318-a484-6e8941b7e9e5/58B1D6BED720162285256C8A0072930A-unhcr-afr-30jun.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_114/raw/doc_114_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,128 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n# DESPERATE JOURNEYS\n\n\n\nFebruary 2017\n\n\n\nRefugees and migrants entering and crossing Europe via the Mediterranean and Western Balkans routes\n\n\n### SUMMARY\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nThe number of refugees and migrants arriving by\nsea to Europe decreased significantly in 2016 from\n2015 with a further decrease since March mostly\ndue to fewer people using the Eastern Mediterranean route. Most refugees and migrants entered\nthe European Union (EU) through three primary\nroutes: the Central Mediterranean route from North\nAfrica to Italy, the Eastern Mediterranean route from\nTurkey to Greece, Bulgaria, and Cyprus, and the\nWestern Mediterranean route from North Africa to\nSpain. The movement along these three routes, as\nwell as onward movement through the Balkans and\nonwards from Italy are the focus of this short report\nanalyzing trends in 2016. Despite border restrictions imposed at several points along key routes,\nthousands entered and moved through Europe\neach month with many likely to be in need of international protection. [1]\n\n\nFollowing the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March and\nthe closure of the so-called Western Balkans route,\nthe Central Mediterranean again became the primary entry point to Europe with most departing from\nLibya but smaller numbers also arriving in Italy from\nEgypt and Turkey. However, arrival trends in Italy\nshow that the primary nationalities of those who had\ncrossed to Greece in 2015 had not switched in significant numbers to the Central Mediterranean route\nin 2016. Among those arriving in Italy, 23% came\nfrom the ten countries currently producing the most\nrefugees globally but arrivals from other countries\nalso included refugees, victims of trafficking, and\nunaccompanied and separated children (UASC).\nMeanwhile in Greece, 87% of arrivals came from the\nten countries currently producing the most refugees\nglobally. In the latter part of the year, an increased\nnumber of people reached Europe through Spain,\nwith rising numbers crossing the sea from Morocco and Algeria, along with further entries by Syri\n\n1  In many locations, refugees and migrants entering Europe or transiting\nthrough countries cross borders irregularly so the data provided in this document is based on official sources but the actual numbers using a particular\nroute may be slightly higher.\n\n\n1\n\n\n\nans and others to the enclaves of Melilla and Ceuta.\nHowever the numbers are much lower than those\nin the Central Mediterranean and the total number\nof arrivals in Spain in 2016 still dropped slightly\nfrom those of 2015 due to fewer land arrivals. 2016\nhas now become the deadliest year on record with\n5,096 deaths at sea recorded.\n\n\nAfter arriving in Europe, many refugees and migrants moved onwards across different countries\nwithin and outside the EU, on many occasions using\nsmugglers. However, larger numbers of people arriving in Italy stayed in Italy, due primarily to restrictions imposed by neighbouring states at the northern borders, with over 176,000 people in reception\ncentres across the country as of the end of the year.\n\n\nIt is of great concern that cases of abuse and violence by smugglers and other criminal networks\ncontinued to take place throughout the region.\nFurthermore, reports of incidents of violence and\npush-backs by state authorities [2] at several borders\ncontinued despite the prohibition on collective expulsions under European and international law and\nthe potential for direct or indirect _refoulement_ .\n\n\nDespite many refugees already in Europe being legally entitled to family reunification, in practice there\nare many obstacles that delay or prevent refugees\nwith immediate family members outside Europe or\neven sometimes elsewhere in Europe from being\nable to reunify. [3] As a result of this and limited other\nlegal pathways available for people seeking international protection to enter Europe, many saw no\nalternative to undertaking dangerous journeys.\n\n\n2 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/5788c85a4/unhcr-con-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/5788c85a4/unhcr-concerned-hungary-pushing-asylum-seekers-serbia.html)\n[cerned-hungary-pushing-asylum-seekers-serbia.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/5788c85a4/unhcr-concerned-hungary-pushing-asylum-seekers-serbia.html) ; [htp://www.unhcr.org/](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html)\n[news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bul-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html)\n[garia-borders.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html) ; [htp://www.acnur.es/notcias/notcias-de-espana/2617-](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/noticias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada)\n[acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-se-](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/noticias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada)\n[gun-el-modo-de-entrada](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/noticias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada) ; [htp://www.unhcr-centraleurope.org/en/news/2016/](http://www.unhcr-centraleurope.org/en/news/2016/unhcr-alarmed-at-refugee-death-on-hungary-serbia-border.html)\n[unhcr-alarmed-at-refugee-death-on-hungary-serbia-border.html](http://www.unhcr-centraleurope.org/en/news/2016/unhcr-alarmed-at-refugee-death-on-hungary-serbia-border.html)\n3 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2016/8/57aca60a4/right-re-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2016/8/57aca60a4/right-reunion-eludes-refugee-families-europe.html)\n[union-eludes-refugee-families-europe.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2016/8/57aca60a4/right-reunion-eludes-refugee-families-europe.html)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n## EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\nIn contrast to 2015, the numbers of those entering\nthe European Union via Turkey in 2016 were far\nsmaller with 173,450 refugees and migrants entering Greece by sea and a further 3,282 by land. In\nBulgaria, 18,884 refugees and migrants were apprehended by authorities over the course of the year \u2013\na significant decrease from apprehensions in 2015\nwith almost half caught in the interior of the country\nin 2016.\n\n\nAfter March, the numbers crossing the sea to\nGreece from Turkey dropped drastically with arrivals\nin October 2016 almost 99% lower than in October\n2015 when 211,663 crossed the Aegean \u2013 an average of 6,828 per day. In 2016, arrivals on the Greek\nislands dropped from an average of 2,175 per day\nin January to 96 per day in October and 54 per day\nin December. While women and children comprised\n60% of arrivals in the first three months of 2016, following the EU-Turkey Statement, women and children made up only 46% of arrivals in the remaining\nnine months of the year with the numbers of children falling from 38% between January and March\nto just 27% for the rest of the year. As the conflict in\nSyria continued to displace civilians, Syrians were\nstill the largest group entering Greece each month\naside from December along with smaller numbers\nof Afghans, Iraqis and Pakistanis and the majority\nof those using the Eastern Mediterranean route are\nlikely to be in need of international protection.\n\n\nIn the latter part of the year, refugees and migrants\nincreasingly diversified their routes out of Turkey\nwith greater numbers attempting to cross the Turkey-Greece land border and 349 arrivals to Cyprus\n\n\n\nreported between August and December. Several\nboats from Turkey continued to land each month in\nItaly as some refugees and migrants sought to avoid\nreturns under the EU-Turkey Statement as well as\nthe arduous Western Balkans crossing. Such arrivals increased 26% from 2,471 in 2015 to 3,114 by the\nend of 2016.\n\n\nDespite the short distance between Turkey and\nsome Greek islands, people continued to drown in\nthe Aegean Sea, including young children, as many\nof them attempted to seek international protection\nin the EU. At least 27 people are thought to have\ndrowned in a single incident as a boat with Syrian\nand Pakistani nationals on board capsized en route\nfrom Bodrum in Turkey to Kos on 29 September. By\nthe end of the year, 441 people had drowned along\nthe Eastern Mediterranean route in 2016 compared\nto 799 in 2015. Although a reduction in absolute\nterms, the proportion of those refugees and migrants that died while attempting to cross the Aegean increased substantially from one in 1,072 in\n2015 to one in 393 in 2016, although most deaths\noccurred between January and March when larger\nnumbers attempted the crossing despite the winter\nweather. At the land borders, the bodies of two unknown refugee or migrant men were found at the\nGreece-Turkey border in October and November\nwhile in late December, the body of a 23-year-old\nPakistani national was found in Turkey near the Bulgarian border.\n\n\nIn the latter part of 2016, UNHCR received several\nreports of people being irregularly returned to Turkey from neighbouring states. In October, UNHCR\n\n\n\nARRIVALS IN GREECE FROM TURKEY VIA LAND AND SEA BORDERS - 2007 TO 2016\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**+**\n\n\n**-**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|856,723<br>December 2009 August 2012 December 2012<br>Greece completes the Greece deploys addi- 12km fence along<br>removal of all land- tional 1,881 police offi- land border with<br>mines from the land cers to land border with Turkey completed.<br>border with Turkey. Turkey.<br>54,974|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n|89<br>14,461<br>8,787<br>81<br>30,149<br>27,68<br><br><br>|47,088<br>30,438<br>5<br>5,190<br>1,030<br>3,646<br><br><br><br>|1,122<br>1,903<br>11,447<br>43,518<br>3,713<br><br><br>|3,2<br>|82<br>173,45<br>|\n|EU-Turke<br>impleme<br>for migr<br>lum-seek<br>inadmiss<br>turned to<br>**March 2016**<br>07<br>2008<br>2009<br>2010<br>2011<br>2012<br>2013<br>2014<br>2015<br>20<br>Arrivals via the land border<br>Arrivals via the sea border|EU-Turke<br>impleme<br>for migr<br>lum-seek<br>inadmiss<br>turned to<br>**March 2016**<br>07<br>2008<br>2009<br>2010<br>2011<br>2012<br>2013<br>2014<br>2015<br>20<br>Arrivals via the land border<br>Arrivals via the sea border|EU-Turke<br>impleme<br>for migr<br>lum-seek<br>inadmiss<br>turned to<br>**March 2016**<br>07<br>2008<br>2009<br>2010<br>2011<br>2012<br>2013<br>2014<br>2015<br>20<br>Arrivals via the land border<br>Arrivals via the sea border|EU-Turke<br>impleme<br>for migr<br>lum-seek<br>inadmiss<br>turned to<br>**March 2016**<br>07<br>2008<br>2009<br>2010<br>2011<br>2012<br>2013<br>2014<br>2015<br>20<br>Arrivals via the land border<br>Arrivals via the sea border|EU-Turke<br>impleme<br>for migr<br>lum-seek<br>inadmiss<br>turned to<br>**March 2016**<br>07<br>2008<br>2009<br>2010<br>2011<br>2012<br>2013<br>2014<br>2015<br>20<br>Arrivals via the land border<br>Arrivals via the sea border|\n\n\n2\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "*Number of persons apprehended for irregular entry at or close to all Bulgarian borders (primarily crossing from Turkey). In total, 18,844 undocumented persons were apprehended in 2016,\nincluding those apprehended elsewhere in the country or trying to exit the country irregularly.\nSources: UNHCR and Ministery of Interior, Bulgaria [https://www.mvr.bg/NR/rdonlyres/022CB329-](https://www.mvr.bg/NR/rdonlyres/022CB329-08B3-42C4-AEDD-64D6C47D48CC/0/Mesechna_spravka_dekemvri_2016.pdf)\n[08B3-42C4-AEDD-64D6C47D48CC/0/Mesechna_spravka_dekemvri_2016.pdf](https://www.mvr.bg/NR/rdonlyres/022CB329-08B3-42C4-AEDD-64D6C47D48CC/0/Mesechna_spravka_dekemvri_2016.pdf)\n\n\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nexpressed its concern after 10 Syrians who had arrived in a group of 91 on the Greek island of Milos\nwere subsequently returned to Turkey despite reportedly having expressed their intention to seek\nasylum in Greece. [4] At the land borders, UNHCR\ncontinued to receive testimonies of refugees and\nmigrants who had crossed the Evros River from Turkey being pushed back by Greek authorities without\nany form of individualized screening or the opportunity to seek asylum, and outside of established\nlegal frameworks. Such practices have also been\nextensively documented in the past by UNHCR and\nothers. [5] Likewise, at the border between Turkey and\nBulgaria, UNHCR continued to receive accounts of\nrefugees and migrants being pushed back from inside Bulgarian territory to Turkey by Bulgarian authorities, also involving the use of violence. Such\nmeasures do not conform with EU Member States\u2019\nobligations to provide access to asylum procedures\nfor those requesting international protection and\nconduct protection screening prior to returning persons to neighbouring states. UNHCR has expressed\nconcerns in the past about such measures [6] including requesting investigations into two incidents in\nwhich deaths occurred. [7] Additionally, Bulgaria continued the construction of a fence along its border\nwith Turkey, a measure that may also impede access to international protection for those seeking\nasylum. [8]\n\n\n4 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/briefng/2016/10/5809e78d4/unhcr-concern-re-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2016/10/5809e78d4/unhcr-concern-return-10-syrian-asylum-seekers-greece.html)\n[turn-10-syrian-asylum-seekers-greece.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2016/10/5809e78d4/unhcr-concern-return-10-syrian-asylum-seekers-greece.html)\n5 [htp://www.refworld.org/docid/54cb3af34.html](http://www.refworld.org/docid/54cb3af34.html)\n6 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/un-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html)\n[hcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/1/56aa19556/unhcr-alarmed-plight-refugees-migrants-bulgaria-borders.html) ; [htp://www.unhcr.](http://www.unhcr.org/53198b489.pdf)\n[org/53198b489.pdf](http://www.unhcr.org/53198b489.pdf)\n7 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2015/3/551abb606/unhcr-concerned-bor-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2015/3/551abb606/unhcr-concerned-border-practices-deaths-iraqis-bulgaria-turkey-border.html)\n[der-practces-deaths-iraqis-bulgaria-turkey-border.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2015/3/551abb606/unhcr-concerned-border-practices-deaths-iraqis-bulgaria-turkey-border.html) ; [htp://www.aljazeera.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/afghan-refugee-shot-dead-enter-bulgaria-151016072352279.html)\n[com/news/2015/10/afghan-refugee-shot-dead-enter-bulgaria-151016072352279.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/afghan-refugee-shot-dead-enter-bulgaria-151016072352279.html)\n[html](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/afghan-refugee-shot-dead-enter-bulgaria-151016072352279.html)\n8 [htp://www.refworld.org/docid/52c598354.html](http://www.refworld.org/docid/52c598354.html)\n\n\n3\n\n\n\n_**Onward movement from Greece and Bulgaria**_\n\n\nBy the end of 2016, relocations to other EU Member\nStates from Greece under the EU\u2019s Emergency Relocation Mechanism remained low with only 7,275\nasylum-seekers (11%) of the September 2017 target\nof 66,400 asylum-seekers relocated from Greece\nafter 16 months of the programme. Despite the efforts of Greek authorities, UNHCR, NGOs, volunteer\ngroups and other actors to improve conditions at\naccommodation sites across Greece, refugees and\nmigrants continued to move on from Greece each\nweek, including to reunite with family members already in the EU as well as due to lengthy delays in\nthe asylum process, substandard reception conditions especially in the winter weather, and limited\nintegration prospects.\n\n\n42,374\n\n\n33,840\n\n\nNUMBERS OF REFUGEES AND MIGRANTS ON THE GREEK MAINLAND\n\n\nThe most commonly used route onwards from\nGreece has generally been via the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia into Serbia but routes\nincreasingly diversified as countries tightened border controls, including following the introduction\nof a new border regime in Hungary in July, which\nincluded a provision to return to the other side of\nthe border fence at the Serbian border those apprehended within 8 km of the border. By the end of the\nyear, entry to Hungary from Serbia was restricted to\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\ntwo \u2018transit zones\u2019 where up to 100 people per week\nwere admitted to seek asylum (a decrease since\nearly November prior to which up to 210 people per\nweek were admitted) and some reported waiting for\nup to six and half months to gain entry. Between 05\nJuly and 31 December, Hungarian police reported\npreventing the irregular entry of 10,496 refugees\nand migrants (an average of 58 per day) and apprehending and returning 8,507 refugees and migrants\nfound within 8 km of the border (an average of 47\nper day).\n\n\nAs a result, the number of refugees and migrants in\nSerbia increased from approximately 2,000 in June\nto 7,000 by the end of the year.\n\n\n7,000\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16\n\n\nPresence in Serbia Occupancy of Govt facilities\n\n\nFollowing the Hungarian restrictions, Serbia too increased controls at its borders with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria from 22\nJuly and reported preventing the irregular entry of\n17,000 refugees and migrants between then and the\nend of the year. [9] New restrictions imposed by Hungary also resulted in those already in Serbia seeking\nalternative ways out of the country and increased\nirregular entries were recorded in Romania from\nSerbia from August onwards with a high of 121 ir\n\n9 [htp://rs.n1info.com/a218255/Vest/Vest/Za-dve-nedelje-uhapseno-25-kri-](http://rs.n1info.com/a218255/Vesti/Vesti/Za-dve-nedelje-uhapseno-25-krijumcara-migranata.html)\n[jumcara-migranata.html](http://rs.n1info.com/a218255/Vesti/Vesti/Za-dve-nedelje-uhapseno-25-krijumcara-migranata.html)\n\n\n\nregular entries from Serbia in October. This prompted stricter controls by Romania along its southwest\nborder resulting in just eight people crossing the\nborder irregularly in November before numbers\nrose again to 112 in December. Increased irregular\nentries to Croatia and Slovenia and even attempts\nto move onwards via Montenegro from Serbia were\nalso observed.\n\n\nRefugees and migrants moving on from Bulgaria\nmostly crossed to Serbia with Bulgarian authorities\nreporting having made 13,776 interceptions at the\nSerbian border up to 29 December in 2016.\n\n\nFrom September onwards, following the increased\nrestrictions at the Bulgaria-Serbia border, more people crossed from Bulgaria to Romania, including at\nleast two groups that managed to cross the Danube\nRiver by boat, with numbers reaching a high of 111 in\nDecember. The use of alternative routes to crossing from Greece to the former Yugoslav Republic of\nMacedonia increased in the second half of the year,\nhowever in lower numbers, with some refugees and\nmigrants attempting to cross via Albania and then\nKosovo or Montenegro to Serbia or else via Bulgaria\nfrom Greece to Serbia.\n\n\nAs States in the region increased border restrictions, refugees and migrants undertook more risky\nways to try to cross borders, including along established routes, resulting in several deaths. At the\nBulgaria-Romania border, during an attempt to cross\nthe Danube River on 09 September, a boat overturned causing two Iraqi nationals, one a six-yearold boy, to drown and four others (three of whom\nwere children) to go missing. In August, an Afghan\nnational was shot dead allegedly accidentally by a\nhunter after irregularly crossing to Serbia from Bulgaria. As winter set in, the body of an 18-year-old Afghan man was found in November in a pump house\nwhere he had sought shelter near Bulgaria\u2019s border\nwith Serbia. In early December, a group arriving in\n\n\n\n35,000\n\n\n30,000\n\n\n25,000\n\n\n20,000\n\n\n15,000\n\n\n10,000\n\n\n5,000\n\n\n     \n\n\n\n\nMONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS IN GREECE BY COUNTRY OF ORIGIN - 2016\n\n\n\n**+**\n\n\n**-**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAfghanistan 18,846 13,943 6,133 580 270 215 201 324 479 410 254 170\n\nIraq 11,964 9,134 2,515 381 162 183 104 327 497 541 220 110\n\nPakistan 2,243 1,539 1,880 637 231 233 345 737 513 105 69 261\n\nOther 1,860 1,445 1,370 711 469 413 687 824 570 677 768 836\n\nIran 2,193 1,593 674 73 64 51 73 123 155 216 70 30\n\n\nArrival figures for Greece are provided by the Hellenic Coast Guard and Police. All figures are provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nthe south of Serbia told authorities that smugglers\nhad forced them to abandon a young Iraqi woman in\nthe mountains as they crossed from Bulgaria as she\ncould no longer walk.\n\n\nUNHCR remains concerned by consistent reports of\npush-backs, including the frequent use of violence\nby state authorities of different countries, which\nappear to contravene the prohibition on collective\nexpulsions and due process standards. In July, UNHCR voiced concerns about push-backs and the\nuse of violence by Hungarian state authorities, [10]\nbut these continued to be reported. Likewise, pushbacks were regularly reported from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, where the majority\nof those apprehended in the country are summarily returned to Greece, along with push-backs from\nSerbia to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria [11], and as push-backs from Croatia\nto Serbia. [12] In multiple cases in the region, UNHCR\n\n\n10 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/5788c85a4/unhcr-con-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/5788c85a4/unhcr-concerned-hungary-pushing-asylum-seekers-serbia.html)\n\n\n\nreceived accounts of persons who had requested\ninternational protection but were denied access to\nasylum procedures and still pushed back. These\nincluded families and persons with specific needs\nincluding unaccompanied children. In some cases,\nin the middle of winter, border authorities allegedly forced refugees and migrants to remove all their\nwarm clothing then sent them back across the border despite the freezing weather.\n\n\nAt the same time, many refugees and migrants reported abuses by smugglers who routinely detained\nand extorted some in sites in the north of the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia, as well as at times\nin Belgrade, Pristina, and Sofia. Others not using\nsmugglers\u2019 services reported being kidnapped by\nthe same smuggler groups. As part of extortion attempts, some smugglers allegedly frequently used\nphysical and sexual violence and torture as well as\ndetained people against their will for several days\nto obtain additional fees above those previously\nagreed upon.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "ing many with international protection needs and\nUASC. While 71% of arrivals in Italy were men, 14%\nof all arrivals (25,846 children) were UASC, mostly\nfrom Eritrea, Gambia, and Nigeria, more than double the 12,360 UASC who arrived in 2015. [13] While\nwomen comprised only 13% of arrivals, they accounted for 29% of Nigerian arrivals and over 20%\nof arrivals from Somalia, Cameroon, Ethiopia, and\nEritrea. IOM has raised concerns that around 80% of\nNigerian women who arrived by sea to Italy in 2016\nmay be victims of trafficking. [14]\n\n\nOf the 181,436 refugees and migrants who reached\nItaly in 2016, 90% departed from Libya with most\nboats departing from the west of the country, especially Sabratha. Many travelled in inflatable boats\n\n\n13 htps://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53357\n14 [htps://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigeri-](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafficked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016)\n[an-women-trafcked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/12/nigerian-women-trafficked-to-italy-for-sex-doubled-2016)\n\n\nMONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS IN ITALY 2013 - 2016\n\n\n30,000\n\n\n\nrefugees and migrants \u201care often beaten, robbed\nand taken to detention centres or private houses\nand farms, where they are subjected to forced labour, rape, and other sexual violence.\u201d [15]\n\n\nAround 6% of those who arrived in Italy departed\nfrom Egypt. While over 4,000 Syrians crossed the\nsea from North Africa in the first half of 2015, in 2016\nthe number of Syrians on this route was far lower\nwith only 1,200 crossing the sea from North Africa\nto Italy.\n\n\nThe number of deaths of refugees and migrants in\nthe Mediterranean as they attempted to reach Europe in 2016 is the highest on record [16], primarily\n\n\n15 [htp://unsmil.unmissions.org/Portals/unsmil/Documents/Migrants%20](http://unsmil.unmissions.org/Portals/unsmil/Documents/Migrants%20report-EN.pdf)\n[report-EN.pdf](http://unsmil.unmissions.org/Portals/unsmil/Documents/Migrants%20report-EN.pdf)\n16 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/briefng/2016/10/580f1d044/mediterranean-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2016/10/580f1d044/mediterranean-death-toll-soars-all-time-high.html)\n[death-toll-soars-all-tme-high.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2016/10/580f1d044/mediterranean-death-toll-soars-all-time-high.html)\n\n\n27,384\n\n\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec\n\n\n2013 2014 2015 2016\n\n6\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\n25,000\n\n\n20,000\n\n\n15,000\n\n\n10,000\n\n\n5,000\n\n\n     \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "MONTHLY SEA ARRIVALS IN ITALY",
-          "confidence": 0.5993187427520752,
-          "start": 187,
-          "end": 192
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Italy",
-          "confidence": 0.809025764465332,
-          "start": 15,
-          "end": 16
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2016",
-          "confidence": 0.503649890422821,
-          "start": 194,
-          "end": 195
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and migrants",
-          "confidence": 0.7165771126747131,
-          "start": 124,
-          "end": 127
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nSEA ARRIVALS IN ITALY: TOP 5 COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN - 2016\n\n\n\ndue to 4,578 deaths in the central Mediterranean,\ncompared to 2,913 in the whole of 2015. [17] The proportion of those refugees and migrants that died\nwhile attempting to cross the central Mediterranean\nin 2016 is one death for every 40 persons crossing,\nwhich is higher than the one in 53 recorded in 2015.\nDespite the presence of multiple governmental and\nNGO search and rescue vessels, people continue\nto drown as boats capsize, including during rescue\nattempts, with some trapped or locked below deck.\nOthers asphyxiate, including after breathing engine\nfumes for hours in an enclosed space, or are even\ncrushed to death in the panic to be rescued. Additional factors contributing to the increase in the\nnumber of deaths include the use of lower quality\nvessels by smugglers especially inflatable boats,\ntravel in bad weather, overloading of boats, and\nsometimes mass embarkations of thousands at a\ntime. Survivors reaching Italy often have horrific injuries, including burns from fuel mixing with sea water in the boat, or else accrued during their journeys\nacross the Sahara or in Libya, often at the hands of\nsmugglers. Other particularly vulnerable persons\nrescued include victims of torture, many survivors\nof sexual violence, women in advanced stages of\npregnancy, and unaccompanied children.\n\n\n17 htps://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53632\n\n\n\nWhile previously most of those arriving in Italy were\nmoving onwards to other European destinations,\nincluding as victims of trafficking, [18] increased restrictions at Italy\u2019s land borders contributed to larger numbers remaining in Italy and seeking asylum\nthere. 123,482 people applied for asylum as of the\nend of the year and over 176,000 accommodated\naround Italy in reception centres. Relocations from\nItaly under the EU\u2019s Relocation Mechanism of asylum-seekers were slow with just 2,654 (7%) of the\n39,600 original target by September 2017 relocated\nafter 16 months of the programme, likely contributing to onward movement. As refugees and migrants\ntried to move onwards and cross into France or\nSwitzerland, increased numbers accumulated in the\ntowns of Ventimiglia and Como requiring the establishment of temporary accommodation facilities. In\nAugust, a group of 48 Sudanese nationals who may\nhave been in need of international protection but\nhad not applied for asylum in Italy were deported\nto Sudan under a bilateral agreement, prompting\nconcerns about whether the agreement includes\nadequate safeguards against _refoulement_ .\n\n\n18 [htps://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/aug/08/trafck-](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/aug/08/trafficking-of-nigerian-women-into-prostitution-in-europe-at-crisis-level)\n[ing-of-nigerian-women-into-prosttuton-in-europe-at-crisis-level](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/aug/08/trafficking-of-nigerian-women-into-prostitution-in-europe-at-crisis-level)\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n\n\nPRIMARY COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF SEA ARRIVALS TO ITALY BY GENDER AND AGE - 2016\n\n\n                                                                            - Accompanied children **Unaccompanied and Separated Children\n\nArrival figures for Italy are provided by the Italian Ministry of Interior. Figures are subject to future adjustment and should not be considered final.\n\n\n7\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\n## WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Sea arrivals to mainland<br>6,979<br>Melilla arrivals<br>3,901|Col2|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n|Melilla arrivals<br>**3,901**<br>Sea arrivals to mainland<br>**6,979**|Melilla arrivals<br>**3,901**|Melilla arrivals<br>**3,901**|\n|Melilla arrivals<br>**3,901**<br>Sea arrivals to mainland<br>**6,979**|Melilla arrivals<br>**3,901**||\n\n\n\nA third route commonly used by refugees and migrants in 2016 was from North Africa to Spain,\nknown as the Western Mediterranean route. Some\ncrossed the Straits of Gibraltar or the Alboran Sea\nin inflatable boats while others crossed into the two\nenclaves in North Africa, Melilla and Ceuta, either by\nclimbing the high surrounding fences or passing undetected through border crossing points. The number of refugees and migrants entering Europe via\nSpain dropped 13% from 16,263 in 2015 to 14,094\nin 2016. One primary reason for the decrease was\nthat fewer Syrians entered Melilla in 2016 with just\n1,927 reaching the enclave in 2016 compared to\n7,164 in 2015 when those in North Africa sought a\nsafer alternative to the sea crossing to Italy from\nLibya. As a result, entries to Melilla dropped from\n9,169 in 2015 to 3,901 in 2016. However, there was\n\n\n\nan 85% increase in numbers of people crossing to\nthe Spanish mainland by sea from North Africa with\n6,979 people crossing this way in 2016. Numbers\ncrossing the sea generally increased throughout\nthe year and peaked in September with 1,132 refugees and migrants reaching the mainland before\nnumbers dropped in line with regional sea crossing\ntrends as the winter weather set in.\n\n\nOf those entering Spain, people in need of protection included those fleeing conflicts in Syria, the\nCentral African Republic, and Yemen; women fleeing sexual and gender-based violence, persons\nfleeing persecution due to their sexual orientation\nor gender identity, and unaccompanied children. In\n2016, the primary nationalities arriving in Spain were\nGuineans (19%), Algerians (17%), Syrians (14%), and\n\n\n\nTOP FIVE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF ARRIVALS TO SPAIN - 2016\n\n\n500\n\n\n450\n\n\n400\n\n\n350\n\n\n\n300\n\n\n250\n\n\n200\n\n\n150\n\n\n100\n\n\n50\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n             \n|Col1|Syrian Arab Republic<br>Guinea<br>Cote d\u2019Ivoire<br>Algeria<br>Cameroon|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n||n<br>Feb<br>Mar<br>Apr<br>May<br>Jun<br>July<br>Aug<br>Sep<br>Oct<br>Nov<br>D|n<br>Feb<br>Mar<br>Apr<br>May<br>Jun<br>July<br>Aug<br>Sep<br>Oct<br>Nov<br>D|\n\n\n\nGuinea 229 148 238 241 216 246 74 123 200 279 171 402\nCote d'Ivoire 92 43 67 128 163 255 133 181 240 274 182 153\nSyrian Arab Republic 119 63 83 138 144 72 134 290 254 264 223 143\nCameroon 150 28 25 144 74 41 27 411 364 116 46 221\nAlgeria 87 39 33 78 57 125 173 62 136 476 257 294\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### Bureau for Europe\n\nIvoirians (14%). While Syrians continued to cross undetected via the border crossing point into Melilla\nand Algerians primarily entered Spain by sea, Guineans were the largest group to enter the enclaves\n(aside from the Syrians) with most crossing via the\nfence and smaller numbers of Guineans crossing\nthe sea to the Spanish mainland. Ivoirians were the\nlargest group to cross the sea to the Spanish mainland. Notably, between August and November, over\n200 Syrians a month entered Spain in search of\ninternational protection, making the Western Mediterranean the second most frequently used entry\npoint to Europe for Syrians after the Eastern Mediterranean.\n\n\nAs more people crossed the sea to the Spanish\nmainland, more people lost their lives at sea with 77\npersons reported dead or missing in 2016 compared\nto 59 in 2015. UNHCR also remains concerned by\nconsistent allegations of automatic returns at the\nSpain-Morocco border. On 10 September, news media footage [19] showed forced returns to Morocco,\n\n\n19 htps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exAIcGiqs_U\n\n\n\nincluding the use of violence, of persons attempting to enter Ceuta via the fences without any form\nof apparent protection screening, prompting statements from UNHCR [20], the Defensor del Pueblo [21]\nas well as a reaction from the Council of Europe\u2019s\nCommissioner for Human Rights. [22] A similar incident took place on 01 January 2017 when over 800\npersons attempted to cross the fence to Ceuta. Of\nthe 106 persons that reached Spanish territory that\nday by climbing the fence only two who required\nhospitalization were allowed to stay and the others were returned to Morocco without any form of\nprotection screening. Further allegations of similar\nreturns were also made in recent months including\nof those on Spanish territory attempting to cross the\nfence to Melilla as well as those entering Ceuta and\nMelilla by sea.\n\n\n20 [htp://www.acnur.es/notcias/notcias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/noticias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada)\n[la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada](http://www.acnur.es/noticias/noticias-de-espana/2617-acnur-recuerda-que-la-convencion-de-ginebra-no-limita-el-derecho-de-asilo-segun-el-modo-de-entrada)\n21 [htps://www.defensordelpueblo.es/notcias/inmigrantes-en-la-valla-de-](https://www.defensordelpueblo.es/noticias/inmigrantes-en-la-valla-de-ceuta/)\n[ceuta/](https://www.defensordelpueblo.es/noticias/inmigrantes-en-la-valla-de-ceuta/)\n22 [htps://twiter.com/CommissionerHR/status/775620525402062848](https://twitter.com/CommissionerHR/status/775620525402062848)\n\n\n\nSEA AND LAND ARRIVALS TO SPAIN 2015 - 2016\n\n\n1,400\n\n\n\nSea 2016\n\n\n\nRead more:\n\n### CONCLUSION\n\n\n\nPeople in need of international protection will con\u00ad\ntinue to need to seek safety in Europe in 2017 and\nbeyond, regardless of the restrictions, including\npush-backs and other abuses at borders, imposed\nto reduce their numbers. In order to prevent further loss of life and reduce the risks to those who\nare seeking safety in Europe, some of whom have\nspouses or other family members already in Europe,\nEuropean States need to expand opportunities for\nsafe path\u00adways. These include the use of resettlement, effective family reunification arrangements,\nprivate sponsorship, work and study visas and other\ncomplementary pathways to access protection. [23] In\naddition, it is important to strengthen the use of re\n\n23 [htp://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/12/58453b614/unhcr-calls-stron-](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/12/58453b614/unhcr-calls-stronger-eu-action-refugees.html)\n[ger-eu-acton-refugees.html](http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2016/12/58453b614/unhcr-calls-stronger-eu-action-refugees.html)\n\n\n\n1,200\n\n\n1,000\n\n\n800\n\n\n600\n\n\n400\n\n\n200\n\n\n\nLand 2015\n\n\nSea 2015\n\n\n\nLand 2016\n\n\n\n0\n\nJan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec\nLand 2015 1,276 602 793 1,142 866 932 863 862 1,032 1,079 945 588\nLand 2016 483 275 253 446 339 334 317 599 656 851 531 848\nSea 2015 264 44 280 243 512 414 380 417 621 1,059 557 492\nSea 2016 492 222 351 451 575 715 458 934 1248 1,110 854 752\n\n\nArrival figures for Spain are provided by Spanish Ministry of Interior and Spanish Police. Figures are subject to future adjustment and should not be considered final.\n\n\n\nlocation for those who have arrived in Greece and\nItaly. For those who have arrived in an EU Member\nState, UNHCR calls for prioritization of family reunion for those with family members elsewhere in\nthe EU, accelerated and simplified asylum determination procedures, a common approach to UASC,\nand increased integration support to reduce the\nincentive for irregular onward movement. Finally,\nUNHCR calls for EU Member States and other Eu\u00ad\nropean States along primary transit routes to halt\nborder practices that are not in accordance with\ninternational and European law, including pushbacks, denial of access to asylum procedures, and\nuse of violence by authorities, and ensure instead\nthat those in need of protection are identified and\nassisted by border authorities.\n\n\n\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n\n\n9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/39a912dc-95f0-3f3f-b26a-d067e72db180/58b449f54.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_115/raw/doc_115_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,199 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "## **Mixed Migration Trends in** **Libya: Changing Dynamics** **and Protection Challenges**\n\nEvolution of the Journey and Situations of Refugees and Migrants in Southern Libya\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Acknowledgements\n\n\nThis report was prepared by Altai Consulting in partnership with IMPACT Initiatives (IMPACT), for the United Nations\n\nRefugee Agency (UNHCR) in Libya. It was written in February 2017 by Marie-Cecile Darme and Tahar Benattia of\n\nAltai Consulting, with the support of Hind Kinani and IMPACT.\n\n\nData collection in Libya was carried out by Istishari Research, Altai Consulting\u2019s local partner, and managed by\n\nKarim Nabata and Omar Hunedy. Marie-Cecile Darme conducted fieldwork in Algeria and Niger, while IMPACT\n\nconducted fieldwork in Chad and Italy.\n\n\nWe are grateful to UNHCR\u2019s Libya office for its role in designing and framing this study, as well as the organisation\u2019s\n\noffices in Algeria, Chad, Niger and Italy, and the International Organisation for Migration\u2019s Libya mission for their\n\nvaluable input and assistance. We are also indebted to the numerous migrants, refugees, government\n\nrepresentatives, humanitarian workers, academic researchers and community members who shared their time and\n\ntheir views with us on the various themes that this study covers.\n\n\nPhotographer Monder Haraga graciously provided the images on the front cover and section pages. All images in\n\nthis report belong to Altai Consulting, unless otherwise stated. All maps in this report were created by Altai Consulting\n\nand IMPACT Initiatives. Layout and graphic design by Marie-Cecile Darme.\n\n\nContact Details\n\n\nIMPACT Initiatives: geneva@impact-initiatives.org\n\nMarie-Cecile Darme: mcdarme@altaiconsulting.com\n\nwww.impact-initiatives.org\n\nwww.altaiconsulting.com\n\n\nPlease note:\n\n\nFor the purposes of this report the expression \u201crefugees and migrants\u201d refers to all people on the move along the\n\nroutes studied, including migrants, asylum seekers, refugees and other populations (such as victims of trafficking\n\nor unaccompanied and separated children), unless a distinction is otherwise made. This study does not include the\n\nsituation of internally displaced persons (IDPs).\n\n\nWhen used separately, the term \u201crefugees\u201d encompasses all persons in need of international protection under\n\nUNHCR\u2019s mandate. This includes refugees recognised as such following a refugee status determination procedure\n\nas well as asylum seekers.\n\n\nAltai Consulting and IMPACT Initiatives prepared this report for review by the United Nations High Commissioner\n\nRefugees (UNHCR). Opinions expressed in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the\n\nviews of the UNCHR.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **Executive Summary**\n\n**5** Migration Trends Across the Mediterranean: Connecting the Dots\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\nIn October 2016, UNHCR commissioned IMPACT Initiatives and Altai Consulting to conduct research on mixed\n\nmigration patterns in Libya, with a particular focus on the south of the country and on communities of concern to\n\nUNHCR.\n\n\nThe objectives were twofold: 1) to track the evolution of mixed migration trends and routes to and within Libya;\n\n2) to map out refugee and migrant concentrations in southern Libya, and to determine their vulnerabilities and\n\nprotection needs.\n\n\nThis report\u2019s findings are based on qualitative data collected between October and December 2016 in Libya, Tunisia,\n\nAlgeria, Italy, Niger, Chad and Italy. In Libya, the research team conducted 72 interviews with key informants **[1]** and\n\n140 with refugees and migrants in eight hotspots in the south of the country and in the capital Tripoli. Another 74\n\ninterviews were conducted with key informants, refugees and migrants in Algeria, Niger, Chad and Italy.\n\n##### MIXED MIGRATION TRENDS ON THE CENTRAL MEDITERRANEAN ROUTE\n\n\nMixed Migration Routes and Flows to Europe\n\n##### \u2022 [Three main routes bring refugees and migrants to Europe: the Western Mediterranean Route (usually via Morocco ]\n\nto Spain), the Central Mediterranean Route (usually via Libya to Italy) and the Eastern Mediterranean Route\n\n(usually via Turkey to Greece).\n##### \u2022 [The Central Mediterranean Route is currently the most active and accounts for the largest number of people ]\n\ncrossing by sea to Europe.\n##### \u2022 [Libya is by far the preferred jumping off point for refugees and migrants from Africa hoping to reach Europe; yet ]\n\nit is particularly unsafe.\n##### \u2022 [In recent years, movements by sea from Libya to Europe have increased and the indications are that it is likely ]\n\nto stay this way. In addition to Libya\u2019s strategic location, conflicts and instability in the country have hindered\n\nborder control and created an environment where smuggling networks can flourish. At the same time, interviews\n\nestablished that instability has pushed refugees and migrants settled in Libya to leave, attempting to cross the\n\nMediterranean to reach Europe.\n##### \u2022 [Most refugees and migrants arrive irregularly in Libya through Sudan (for those from East Africa), Niger (for those ]\n\nfrom West and Central Africa), or, to a lesser extent, Algeria (for those from West Africa). Routes through Sudan\n\nsometimes cross into Chad and routes through Niger in some cases pass through Algeria.\n##### \u2022 [Regardless of the route used, those coming to Libya form mixed migration flows, meaning that people with different ]\n\nbackgrounds and motivations travel together along the same routes.\n\n\n**1.** Key informants interviewed included smugglers, local and national-level authorities, civil society organisations (CSOs), and\ninternational non-governmental organisations (INGOs) supporting refugees and migrants, diplomats, community leaders,\ndetention centre managers, border guards and coast guards.\n\n\nMixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges **1**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "interviews",
-          "confidence": 0.665005087852478,
-          "start": 161,
-          "end": 162
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and migrants",
-          "confidence": 0.5500217080116272,
-          "start": 168,
-          "end": 171
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### \u2022 [The total number of refugees and migrants in Libya (whether in transit or settled in the country) does not appear ]\n\nto have decreased in recent years. Ongoing conflict since 2014 might have pushed numerous refugees and\n\nmigrants settled in Libya to leave, but increasing numbers also seem to be arriving.\n##### \u2022 [The profiles and nationalities of arrivals in Libya have evolved in the past few years. There seems to be a decrease ]\n\nfrom East Africa but an increase from West Africa.\n##### \u2022 [While Syrians used to transit through Libya on their way to Italy,] [2 ] [this was no longer the case in 2016. Most Syrians ]\n\nnow take the Eastern Mediterranean Route to reach Europe.\n##### \u2022 [Foreign nationals coming to Libya are predominantly young, single men with a low level of education. A majority ]\n\nreports moving to or migrating through Libya for economic reasons. However, profiles vary. Refugees and migrants\n\ncan be grouped into four loose categories:\n\n\n       - Nationals of neighbouring countries (Niger, Chad, Sudan, Egypt and Tunisia) mostly report travelling to\n\nLibya for economic reasons. They often intend to stay in Libya as opposed to crossing the Mediterranean\n\nto reach Europe. Their migration is often temporary (a few months to a few years) and they may come\n\nand go several times.\n\n\n**2.** Syrians were the first nationality to come to Libya and travel on the Central Mediterranean Route in 2015.\n\n\n**2** Mixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "   - Nationals of West and Central African countries come mainly from Nigeria, Guinea, C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, The\n\nGambia, Senegal, Ghana, Mali and Cameroon. Most of them report having left for economic reasons.\n\nThey are young and vulnerable to ill-treatment.\n\n\n   - Nationals of East African countries (Eritrea, Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan), **[3]** report having left their\n\ncountries of origin because of political persecution, conflict and economic distress. They tend to transit\n\nquickly through Libya on their way to Europe.\n\n\n   - Nationals from outside Africa usually originate from non-neighbouring Arab countries. They are often\n\nfleeing conflict and are more prone to travel as family units. They tend to be skilled and have a higher level\n\nof education. Syrians, Palestinians and Iraqis form the bulk of respondents from this group.\n\n##### \u2022 [Trafficking for sexual exploitation seems to be increasing, affecting Nigerian and Cameroonian women in particular.] \u2022 [The number of Unaccompanied and Separated Children (UASC)] [4] [ travelling alone in Libya is rising, now ]\n\nrepresenting some 14% of total arrivals in Europe via the Central Mediterranean Route, mainly from Eritrea, The\n\nGambia and Nigeria.\n##### \u2022 [Dire economic circumstances, a lack of job opportunities, the political and security situation and human rights ]\n\nabuses are the main reasons for refugees and migrants in Libya to leave their countries of origin.\n##### \u2022 [Not all those coming to Libya intend to go to Europe: about half of them claim they wish to remain there either ]\n\npermanently or temporarily, before returning to their countries of origin. Most of those who intend to stay are drawn\n\nto the country\u2019s job opportunities. However, the lack of stability, security and rule of law, the economic crisis and\n\nwidespread abuse and exploitation pushes some of these to also attempt to reach Europe.\n\n\nSmuggling\n\n##### \u2022 [Almost all refugees and migrants coming to Libya irregularly seek the help of smugglers or criminal networks. ]\n\nOnly migrants from Sudan, Niger and Chad traveling to Libya for seasonal work sometimes cross the border\n\nwithout.\n##### \u2022 [Smuggling can take very different forms, from highly-structured, hierarchical transnational organisations to ]\n\nloosely-connected, informal, horizontal networks.\n##### \u2022 [The smuggling industry is currently undergoing rapid expansion in Libya. Smuggling networks are dynamic, in ]\n\nconstant evolution and, it would appear, increasingly professional.\n##### \u2022 [Smuggling networks can involve a variety of stakeholders and intermediaries. Sea crossings are often organised ]\n\nfrom coastal areas by different smuggling networks than those who help people to move up through the country\n\non land.\n##### \u2022 [Armed groups dominate the smuggling and trafficking business. Their profiles and tribal backgrounds vary ]\n\naccording to the region and specific leg of the journey.\n\n\n**3.** Note that Sudan also falls into the category \u201cneighbouring countries\u201d. Some refugees and migrants from Sudan intend to cross\nto Europe and can be found along the same smuggling routes as refugees and migrants from East Africa, while others come as\nneighbours to work in Libya for a while before going back to their country. **4.** UASC refers to children (persons under the age\nof 18) who are not being cared for by an adult who, by law or custom, is responsible for them.\n\n\nMixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### \u2022 [Smuggling costs for refugees and migrants fluctuate based on factors including nationalities, perceived economic ]\n\nstatus, the level of service required and the smuggling network itself.\n##### \u2022 [Respondents indicated that smuggling prices to and through Libya have increased (reportedly by at least 30%) ]\n\nin the past couple of years, due in part to the clear deterioration of the security situation in Libya, the multiplication\n\nof smuggling intermediaries and the high inflation, liquidity and foreign currency crises in Libya.\n\n\nThe Journey\n\n\nThere are a wide array of routes, price scales and quality options for refugees and migrants in Libya. However, two\n\nprincipal types of journey are evident:\n##### \u2022 [\u201cOrganised\u201d journeys are akin to a complete travel package deal from country of origin to country of destination.]\n\n\n        - The whole journey is taken care of by a transnational, structured smuggling network. Those smuggled\n\nare provided with basic accommodation and food, and do not deal directly with intermediaries.\n\n\n        - Costs for this type of journey are particularly high (often around USD 5,000 from the country of origin to\n\nthe Libyan coast). Refugees and migrants pay for the whole trip at once, in some cases through\n\ninternational wire transfers from relatives or community members in Europe or America.\n\n\n        - This type of journey is mostly undertaken from East Africa.\n\n\n        - People on an organised journey usually transit through Libya as quickly as possible on their way to Europe\n\nand seldom stop in Libyan cities. The trip from their countries of origin to the coast usually does not take\n\nlonger than two to three weeks.\n\n##### \u2022 [\u201cStep-by-step\u201d journeys are fragmented into several legs, and are organised by refugees and migrants ]\n\nthemselves.\n\n\n        - Different smugglers are used for each leg of the journey. Refugees and migrants pay the smuggler in\n\ncharge of each leg separately in cash before departure. Food and accommodation are often not included.\n\n\n        - Those travelling stop between each leg of the journey to work or receive money from relatives to fund the\n\nnext leg.\n\n\n        - The overall journey from country of origin to the Libyan coast takes much longer than the \u201corganised\u201d\n\nversion, often several months.\n\n\n        - This type of journey is mostly undertaken by West and Central Africans.\n\n\n        - Smugglers might know each other and redirect their clients to the next person they need to carry on with\n\ntheir journey. However, they are not part of structured and hierarchal smuggling networks.\n\n\n        - Step-by-step journeys are generally significantly cheaper than organised journeys, yet prices vary widely.\n\n##### \u2022 [Most refugees and migrants interviewed in Libya said they learned about the route and its risks from friends, ]\n\nacquaintances or members of their community. Levels of information vary according to the country of origin, but\n\noverall, a significant number of respondents knew little about details such as how long it the sea journey to Europe\n\nwould take or how much it would cost.\n\n\n**4** Mixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Routes within Libya\n\n##### \u2022 [The main entry points into Libya have not changed in recent years. Refugees and migrants from East Africa ]\n\nusually cross the Sudanese border south-east of Kufra, while refugees and migrants from West and Central\n\nAfrica mostly arrive from Niger to the south of Sebha. Other entry points include Ras Jedir at the Tunisian border,\n\nGhat or Ghadames at the Algerian border, and Salloum at the Egyptian border.\n##### \u2022 [The routes within Libya have evolved since 2013, however, with the northeast of the country now largely avoided ]\n\nbecause of recurrent fighting. At the time of research, people rarely passed through or stopped in Benghazi or\n\nAjdabiya and those going from East Africa to the Libyan coast travelled through the Kufra area to Bani Walid\n\ndirectly, or to Sebha.\n##### \u2022 [Those transiting now stop less than they used to. They are also less inclined to stay for long periods of time in ]\n\nthe south of Libya, due in part to the many conflicts that the region has known in the past few years.\n##### \u2022 [Tripoli remains the main city people stop in to seek work and ways to reach Europe. However, Bani Walid is ]\n\nemerging as a new stop-off point en route to the coast. In the South, Sebha is the preferred hub, while transit\n\nthrough Kufra city has decreased.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### MIXED MIGRATION IN THE SOUTH\n\n\n\nRefugee and Migrant Communities\n### **INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND**\n\n\n\nRefugee and Migrant Communities\n\n\n##### \u2022 [Refugees and migrants usually only stay a few days to a maximum of two months in the South before heading ]\n\n\n\nfor northern Libya.\n##### \u2022 [Respondents in the southern cities of Sebha, Kufra, Gatrun, Murzuq, Ubari and Ghat reported staying in shared ]\n\naccommodation in specific neighbourhoods, depending on the tribal background of the smugglers used.\n##### \u2022 [Relatively few refugees and asylum seekers reside in the South.] [5] [ Most refugees and asylum seekers settled in ]\n\nLibya (as opposed to transiting through it) are Palestinians, Syrians and Iraqis who arrived many years or\n\ndecades ago. They are employed and well-integrated, and usually live in northern urban centres.\n##### \u2022 [People on organised journeys transiting through the South stay for very short period of times in ]\n\nsmuggler-controlled locations often on the outskirts of cities, and are particularly vulnerable. They are barely\n\nvisible and difficult to reach.\n\n\nVulnerabilities\n\n##### \u2022 [People travelling along the western or eastern routes to and through Libya face harsh environmental conditions, ]\n\na lack of rule of law and prevalence of criminal networks, unsafe means of transportation (pick-up trucks and\n\nrubber boats for instance), and minimal or no access to food, water and medical support.\n##### \u2022 [Along the route, they often fall victims to extortion and ill-treatment including being insulted, beaten, robbed, or ]\n\ndetained until they paid more money. Some end up being subject to trafficking, forced labour, sexual violence\n\nand exploitation.\n##### \u2022 [In Libya, respondents cited additional issues \u2013 many of which attributable to the current instability \u2013 such as: ]\n\ninsecurity and armed violence, racism and discrimination against people of sub-Saharan origin, lack of livelihood,\n\naccommodation, healthcare and education opportunities, as well as the degradation of the economic situation.\n##### \u2022 [Vulnerabilities vary depending on country of origin. ]\n\n\n        - In the South, Sudanese, Nigeriens and Chadians are reportedly mostly settled, integrated and therefore\n\nless vulnerable. Syrians, Palestinians and Iraqis in the North are in a comparable situation: they are\n\nusually well settled but they do face specific difficulties such as administrative obstacles when renewing\n\nofficial documents.\n\n\n        - Eritreans, Somalis and Ethiopians are usually only in transit through the South, in most cases using\n\n\u201corganised journeys\u201d offered by transnational and structured smuggling networks. They are vulnerable\n\nbecause they are under the constant control of smugglers during their stay in Libya and it is difficult for\n\nthem to reach support organisations. They are thought to be at particular risk of trafficking, as trafficking\n\nnetworks that operate in North Africa tend to offer the kind of full package journeys they purchase.\n\n\n**5.** Note that this key finding is specific to refugees and asylum seekers, as opposed to migrants.\n\n\n**6** Mixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The high cost of the \u201corganised journey\u201d packages also means that large debts may be built up, increasing\n\nthe risk of exploitation and coercion for debt repayment.\n\n\n\n\n- West and Central Africans seem to be the main victims of abuse and ill-treatment by smugglers and the\n\n\n\nlocal population. They are usually younger than other refugees and migrants, less educated, less skilled\n### INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND and possess fewer resources.\n\n\n\nlocal population. They are usually younger than other refugees and migrants, less educated, less skilled\n\n\n\nand possess fewer resources.\n\n\n\nSupporting Refugees and Migrants in the South\n\n##### \u2022 [Support to refugees and migrants is very limited in the South. Local civil society organisations (CSOs) struggle ]\n\nto operate and only a few provide services to refugees and migrants. Due to the multiple conflicts, most\n\nnon-governmental organisations (NGOs) and international organisations (IOs) have left the region. Support by\n\nthe Libyan authorities and public agencies is also scarce.\n##### \u2022 [While some refugee and migrant communities have unofficial representatives, there were only three official ]\n\ndiplomatic missions open in the South at the time of the research. **[6]** Some respondents indicated being reluctant\n\nto interact with these for a variety of reasons, including conditions in their country of origin, irregular entry or\n\npresence in Libya or reports that some official representatives might collaborate with smugglers. Of note here\n\nis that refugees would not normally seek consular protection and assistance from the authorities of their country\n\nof origin. Depending on the root causes and specific circumstances of flight, contacting diplomatic or consular\n\nauthorities might put refugees at risk.\n##### \u2022 [Approximately half of respondents in Libya declared having been directly supported by other refugees and ]\n\nmigrants in the country.\n##### \u2022 [A large majority of refugees and migrants interviewed in Libya had access to a functioning phone at all times, ]\n\nregardless of their country of origin, and communicated regularly with their relatives. Internet access, on the\n\nother hand, was far less widespread and more irregular.\n##### \u2022 [Numerous gaps were identified in service delivery and assistance, including direct humanitarian and medical ]\n\nassistance and protection against trafficking and other human rights violations. The availability of information\n\non the rights of refugees and migrants was also severely lacking as was legal and other support with\n\nadministrative processes, such as obtaining/renewing official documents.\n\n##### CONCLUSIONS\n\n\nMixed migratory movements to Libya and from Libya to Europe appear to have significantly increased in 2016.\n\nWhile it is difficult to predict the evolution of migration flows, considerations that factor into the decision of refugees\n\nand migrants to make their way to Libya irregularly and stay in the country or leave for Europe can be categorized.\n\nLooking at these indicators, it seems likely that Libya will remain the main transit hub for refugees and migrants\n\nto reach Europe from Africa in the coming years.\n\n\n**6.** The only consulates functioning in the South at the time of research were those of Chad, Nigeria and Mali, all located in Sebha.\n\n\nMixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges **7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "research",
-          "confidence": 0.6607704758644104,
-          "start": 219,
-          "end": 220
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Libya",
-          "confidence": 0.8301137089729309,
-          "start": 256,
-          "end": 257
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant communities",
-          "confidence": 0.6003035306930542,
-          "start": 194,
-          "end": 198
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Main Changes in Recent Years\n\n\n\nWith the deepening of the political and security crisis in Libya since 2013, migration dynamics in the country have\n\n\n\nknown significant evolutions:\n### INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND \u2022 [Routes and transit hubs within Libya have changed. People no longer travel through the northeast of the country ]\n\n\n\nknown significant evolutions:\n\n\n##### \u2022 [Routes and transit hubs within Libya have changed. People no longer travel through the northeast of the country ]\n\n\n\nand Bani Walid has emerged as a new hub.\n##### \u2022 [Countries of origin and profiles of refugees and migrants have evolved. In particular, flows from West Africa ]\n\nhave increased, involving individuals usually travelling \u201cstep-by-step\u201d.\n##### \u2022 [Refugees and migrants are less likely to seek to settle in Libya or stop in Libyan cities for more than a few weeks ]\n\n(in particular in the South).\n##### \u2022 [The smuggling industry has grown increasingly professional and transnational smuggling organizations further developed.] \u2022 [Armed groups play an increasingly dominant role in the smuggling industry.] \u2022 [Smuggling prices have generally risen. ] \u2022 [Refugees and migrants making the journey to and within Libya are more vulnerable, while support services ]\n\nhave decreased and the security situation has deteriorated. In particular, fewer CSOs, NGOs and IOs are able\n\nto continue actively supporting refugees and migrants on the ground, especially in the South.\n\n\nSome aspects have remained unchanged however, including the routes people take to reach Libya, entry points\n\ninto the country and the fact that all flows are mixed, involving individuals from very different backgrounds and\n\nwith different motivations travelling alongside each other in search of safety, protection or livelihood opportunities.\n\n\nImplications of Lack of Service Provision and Protection of Refugees and Migrants\n\n\nThe recent evolutions identified above have implications for protection and service provision from the international\n\ncommunity, such as the following.\n##### \u2022 [Since those travelling through Libya are highly mobile, they would be best reached through mobile teams. In ]\n\nthe South in particular, vulnerable individuals tend to be difficult to reach and to stay in the region for short\n\nperiods of time only, thus a permanent centre would not be, in its own, sufficient to answer their needs.\n##### \u2022 [Smugglers of different backgrounds use different roads, tracks, transit cities and neighbourhoods within Libya, ]\n\nso protection interventions must cover large geographical areas, rather than just targeting specific cities.\n##### \u2022 [As routes and transit hubs within Libya may evolve quickly given the extreme volatility of the political and security ]\n\ncontext, operational locations need to be regularly re-assessed.\n##### \u2022 [Refugees and migrants have become less visible, in particular those traveling on \u201corganised journeys\u201d, who ]\n\nremain under the control of smugglers throughout their stay in Libya and are usually held in private locations\n\non the outskirts of cities. This means cooperation with local civil society is essential to access vulnerable\n\nindividuals and provide them with support \u2013 especially given that the international community is often forced to\n\noperate remotely due to the current instability in Libya.\n##### \u2022 [Refugees and migrants are often unable to reach out for support themselves, because they do not have freedom ]\n\n\n**8** Mixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "of movement, they experience a language barrier, they lack reliable information on support available, or they\n\nare concerned about the intentions of those providing support. It is therefore necessary to proactively reach out\n\nto them and supplement information centres with methods of dissemination that work with current dynamics.\n##### \u2022 [Since migration flows are mixed and specific circumstances in Libya make it difficult to distinguish refugees, ]\n\nasylum seekers and migrants, comprehensive response and referral mechanisms are paramount.\n##### \u2022 [Humanitarian interventions need to be coordinated across borders routes from countries of origin to destination ]\n\nsince the risks and vulnerabilities of migrants are not particular to the countries they find themselves in.\n##### \u2022 [Given the current political context in Libya, refugees and migrants who came regularly to Libya or whose situation ]\n\nwas regularized in the past need support renewing official documentation.\n\n##### RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UNHCR AND OTHER ORGANISATIONS SUPPORTING REFUGEES AND MIGRANTS IN LIBYA\n\n\nDirect Humanitarian Assistance for Refugees and Migrants in Libya\n\n##### \u2022 [Provide direct relief in the form of mobile joint interventions in key hubs in the South (Sebha, Ubari, Gatrun, ]\n\nMurzuq, Bani Walid, Rebyana, Tazerbu, and Kufra for instance), where assistance could be delivered weekly\n\nor bi-weekly.\n##### \u2022 [In addition to health care, food and non-food items (e.g. hygiene kits), direct assistance should include ]\n\npsychosocial support, counselling services and temporary shelter.\n##### \u2022 [Accompany border monitoring and rescue operations (after conducting due diligence checks) to provide support ]\n\nto refugees and migrants stranded in the desert, while raising awareness of patrols of the human rights, needs\n\nand vulnerabilities of refugees and migrants.\n##### \u2022 [Provide support to local communities/stakeholders on the management of human remains in accordance with ]\n\ninternational standards.\n##### \u2022 [Support the renewal of documentation and other administrative processes, in particular for established ]\n\nnon-national communities in Libya and those who wish to remain in the country.\n\n\nInformation Sharing and Referrals for Refugees and Migrants in Libya\n\n##### \u2022 [Inform refugees and migrants about support provided by the different organisations active on the issue, their ]\n\nrights, as well as available legal pathways to protection or migration.\n##### \u2022 [Establish referral mechanisms to CSOs, INGOs, IOs and authorities and maintain an updated roster of those ]\n\nactively providing support.\n##### \u2022 [Support the establishment of self-help support mechanisms and trustworthy community networks, committees ]\n\nand organisations of refugees and migrants in Libya.\n\n\nMixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges **9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### \u2022 [Provide information on the risks of irregular migration by sea or land as well as policy changes in transit countries ]\n\nand in Europe to allow refugees and migrants to make informed decisions.\n##### \u2022 [Engage with diaspora communities in destination countries to encourage them to communicate on available ]\n\n\n##### \u2022 [Engage with diaspora communities in destination countries to encourage them to communicate on available ]\n\nlegal pathways and protection services, the risks of irregular movements and living conditions in Europe in order\n### INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND to manage expectations. [7]\n\n\n\nlegal pathways and protection services, the risks of irregular movements and living conditions in Europe in order\n\n\n\nto manage expectations. **[7]**\n\n\n\nAdvocacy and Awareness Raising for Libyan Authorities and Citizens\n\n##### \u2022 [Promote the development of a migration management framework that is sensitive to the protection needs of ]\n\nrefugees and other vulnerable populations; advocate for the decriminalisation of irregular migration.\n##### \u2022 [Advocate for the development of a functioning asylum system in the country, including early identification of ]\n\npersons in need of international protection, adequate reception facilities, durable solutions, and clear allocation\n\nof roles and responsibilities of the different institutions in charge of migration and asylum.\n##### \u2022 [Advocate on the necessity to prosecute smugglers and enforce laws against trafficking.] \u2022 [Continue efforts with authorities to ensure that the certificates] [8] [ given by UNHCR are respected and provide the ]\n\nprotection that they should.\n##### \u2022 [Raise the awareness of authorities in direct contact with mixed migration flows about the legal differences ]\n\nbetween refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, and imperative of respect of the human rights of all.\n##### \u2022 [Advocate for decent conditions in detention facilities as well as for alternatives to detention, with an immediate ]\n\npriority being the release of those most vulnerable.\n##### \u2022 [Conduct awareness-raising media campaigns targeting the general public in Libya with information about ]\n\nrefugees and migrants and their rights, to reduce racism, discrimination, exploitative practices and\n\nmisconceptions.\n##### \u2022 [Encourage civil society to engage more with refugees and migrants, in particular in the case of CSOs already ]\n\nactive with internally displaced persons (IDPs).\n\n\n**7.** Note that these recommendations can only be truly efficient if they go hand in hand with the development of legal alternatives\nto irregular migration and enhanced access to international protection when necessary. **8.** In Libya, UNHCR provides basic\ndocumentation following registration in the form of Attestation Certificates mentioning that the bearer is a person of concern to\nUNHCR. In 2016, a total of 1,850 individuals were registered and therefore provided with Attestation Certificates.\n\n\n**10** Mixed Migration Trends in Libya: Changing Dynamics and Protection Challenges\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/ba6c0864-12d0-3e2b-992c-5855136dc83c/595a02b44.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_116/raw/doc_116_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,193 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **COMMISSARIAT HIGH** **POUR LES COMMISSIONER** **REFUGIES FOR REFUGEES** **BACKGROUND PAPER**\n\n### **ON** **THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN**\n# **RWANDA**\n\n## **UNHCR** **CENTRE FOR DOCUMENTATION AND RESEARCH** **GENEVA, JANUARY 2000**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **TABLE OF CONTENTS**\n\n**1. REVIEW OF THE GENERAL HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION** 1\n\n\n**2. THE SITUATION IN THE NORTH-WESTERN PROVINCES** 3\n\n\n**3. THE NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT** 4\n\n\n**4. GENERAL RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS** 5\n\n\n**4.1 VULNERABLE GROUPS** **12**\n\n\n**5. THE VILLAGISATION POLICY** 13\n\n\n**BIBLIOGRAPHY** 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **1. Review of the General Human Rights Situation [1]**\n\nSecurity in Rwanda has improved since the Rwandan Patriotic Army\u2019s (RPA)\nintervention in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), particularly in the\nNorth-West region. The war in the DRC permitted the RPA to fight the rebel militias\nthat have been operating in the North-West Rwanda since 1997. However, a harsh\nrepression of Hutu civilians, who are perceived as potential allies of the rebellion, was\nimposed by the Rwandan army. The RPA has been accused of using excessive force\nin its attempt to suppress the insurgency. [2]\n\nSince the beginning of 1999, there have been growing accusations of government\ncorruption and self-enrichment. In February 1999 and again in January 2000, the\ngovernment was reshuffled and those dismissed accused of corruption and\nincompetence.\n\nNational political leaders also removed four members of the National Assembly,\ncharging them with involvement in the genocide, links to the insurgency, or\ncorruption. [3] Other parliamentarians were obliged to resign or simply removed. At the\nend of 1999, one third of the National Assembly was replaced, all by individuals\ndesignated by party leaders. Ministers were also affected, in particular the one not\nbelonging to the ruling RPF. [4] During 1999, the President and the Prime Minister were\nboth accused of participation in the genocide, but remained in power and were not\nbrought to trial.\n\nIn July 1999, the entire Supreme Court was replaced, after the judges were removed\nor pressured to resign, reportedly charged with responsibility for the stagnation of the\njudicial system. [5]\n\nIn March 1999, the government organized the first elections at the two most local\nlevels, Cell and Sector. The elections were carried out by lining up behind candidates.\nNo political parties were allowed to contest the elections. Nearly 90 percent of adult\nRwandans voted. Reportedly, in some places soldiers and civilian authorities used\nforce or threats to try to compel hesitant persons to vote or to stand for office. [6]\n\nIn mid-1999, the National Assembly extended the period of the transition government,\nestablished with the Arusha Accord, by another four years.\n\n\n1 This paper is an update of the December 1998 UNHCR Background Paper on Rwanda prepared by\nthe Centre for Documentation and Research (CDR). This paper focuses on the human rights situation in\nthe country during 1999.\n2 European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation, _Rwanda Country Survey_, 1999.\n3 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n4 Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), _Country Report_, 4th Quarter 1999, 8.\n5 United Kingdom Home Office, _Rwanda Country Assessment_, September 1999.\n6 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ ; and EIU, _Country Profile 1999-2000_, 10.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "_Rwanda Country Survey_",
-          "confidence": 0.8812153339385986,
-          "start": 462,
-          "end": 465
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation",
-          "confidence": 0.9681732058525085,
-          "start": 454,
-          "end": 461
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "1999",
-          "confidence": 0.8577558994293213,
-          "start": 451,
-          "end": 452
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2\n\n\nAlthough ready to concede citizens a limited voice in local government, authorities\nfailed to consult them about decisions of national policy that were central to their\nlives, such as the imposition of the villagisation programme. [7] Over the years, the\ncurrent government demonstrated a lack of interest in establishing a broad political\npower base and in processes leading to power-sharing. Instead, gradual exclusion of\nHutu opponents from the top political levels, as well as in the administration and in\nthe judiciary, added to the current conflict potential. [8]\n\nIn December 1998, the Secretary of State to the Minister of Interior, one of the highest\nplaced Hutu post-1994 returnee in the Rwandan government, fled the country after her\nbrothers were arrested on charges of aiding the insurgents. [9] Shortly after, the Minister\nof Justice also left for exile, reportedly after his efforts to curb military interference in\njudicial decisions had failed. [10]\n\nOn 10 July 1999, a court in Rushashi, Kigali, sentenced four people to death in the\nfirst trial of suspects accused of playing a role in the two-year insurgency that killed\nthousands in the country\u2019s North-West. Six people were given life sentences; seven\nothers jail terms ranging between one and twenty years while seven others were set\nfree. [11]\n\nOn 23 December 1999, at least 31 people were killed and eight others wounded in a\nrebel attack against a village of displaced people in Gisenyi. The attackers came from\nthe Eastern region of the DRC. The attack was blamed on the former Rwandan Armed\nForces (ex-FAR) and on _Interahamwe_ militia.\n\nThe international community, still burdened by guilt over the genocide, ignored\nreports of abuses and supported the Government of Rwanda generously, hoping to\nachieve stability in the region. During 1999, foreign aid paid for about 45 percent of\nthe budget. [12]\n\nIn the DRC, by June 1999, the Congolese rebels, supported by Rwanda, Uganda and\nBurundi, controlled large areas in the North and East of the country. Africa led efforts to\nfind a negotiated settlement, with President Frederick Chiluba of Zambia chairing a series\nof summits under the auspices of the Southern African Development Community. On 10\nJuly 1999, Heads of State of the countries involved in the war, signed a cease fire\nagreement in Lusaka. Following further negotiations, the rebels Movement pour la\nLiberation du Congo (MLC) signed on 1 August and the Rassemblement Congolais pour la\nD\u00e9mocratie (RCD) on 31 August. However, the cease-fire has not been thoroughly\nenforced.\n\n\n7 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n\n[8] European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation, _Rwanda Country Survey_, 1999.\n\n[9] EIU, _Country Report_, 1 [st] Quarter 1999, 13.\n\n[10] Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n11 Reuters News Service, 10 July 1999.\n12 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "3\n\n\nAt the end of 1999, some 42 Rwandan university students were seeking asylum in Uganda,\nreportedly fearing for their lives in Rwanda. The students, born in Uganda from Rwandan\nparents, had moved back to Rwanda after the 1994 genocide and, finding it difficult to\nstudy in French at university level, staged a protest on 16 August 1999 that resulted in some\narrests. The demonstration was against the government policy of the introduction of\nbilingual education system, therefore, they were perceived as opponents of the government.\nThe students stated that an academic issue was politicized and added, \u201c[they] had written to\nthe Prime Minister, a member of the Hutu Mouvement D\u00e9mocratique Republicain (MDR),\nregarding their plight. The government started to say that they were working with the MDR\nand started to call them _Interahamwe_ .\u201d [13]\n\n# **2. The Situation in the North-Western Provinces**\n\n\nAt the end of 1999, the Government of Rwanda had largely defeated the insurgency that\nincluded members of the ex-FAR and _Interahamwe_ militia, which operated in the NorthWestern provinces of Rwanda and in the border region of the DRC for the past eighteen\nmonths. However, according to Human Rights Watch, during this period the Rwandan\ntroops killed thousands of people, many of them unarmed civilians, and forced hundreds of\nthousands of Rwandans to move into government established \u2018villages\u2019. [14]\n\nThe human rights situation in Rwanda deteriorated during 1998, as the Hutu\ninsurgency gathered strength, spreading from the North-Western regions of Gisenyi\nand Ruhengeri to the central region of Gitarama. The RPA continued to use brutal\ntactics throughout 1998 and killed hundreds of civilians in the course of fighting the\ninsurgents. [15] The number of disappearances rose sharply during the same period. [16]\n\nAs part of its effort to suppress the insurgency and to reduce local support to the rebels, the\ngovernment moved hundreds of thousands of people in the two North-Western provinces\ninto supervised camps.\n\nIn connection with the security situation in the North-West, in August 1998, the\nGovernment of Rwanda invaded the DRC, purportedly to ensure its state security. The\nGovernment of Rwanda accused President Laurent D\u00e9sir\u00e9 Kabila of instigating\ngenocide against Tutsis in the DRC, and of providing military training for 10,000\nRwandan Hutu rebels. This move threatened further escalation of the conflict within\nRwanda\u2019s borders. After having destroyed Hutu rebel bases near the border in the Kivu\nregion, the government sent troops hundreds of miles into Congolese territory.\n\nThe war in the DRC interrupted the supply lines of the militia active in the NorthWest Rwanda, and security in this area greatly improved during the course of 1999.\nIntense operations by the RPA combined with disillusionment with the insurgency\ndrove thousands of people who had abandoned their homes to return to the relatively\nsafer areas controlled by the RPA. [17] The Government of Rwanda encouraged some of\nthese returnees to settle temporarily in makeshift camps and centres where their\n\n\n13 Integrated Regional Information Network (IRIN), _Students Claim Ruling Party \u201cPoliticizing\u201d_\n_Education_, 17 December 1999.\n14 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n15 U.S. Department of State (USDOS), _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n16 Amnesty International, _Annual Report_, 1999.\n17 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "4\n\n\nsecurity could be better assured. In December 1998 the United Nations Office of the\nHumanitarian Coordinator (OCHA) estimated that there were 625,713 displaced\npeople in Ruhengeri and Gisenyi Provinces.\n\nAt the end of 1998, with the improvement of the security situation, the government ordered\nthe displaced to relocate once more to officially designated \u2018villages\u2019 on the line of the\nvillagisation policy conducted by the government. Applied to the situation in the NorthWest the programme appeared to be primarily directed to reduce the likelihood of a new\ninsurgency. By late 1999, 94 percent of the people in the North-West who had been in\ncamps had been moved into villages. Others, who were still in their own homes, had been\nordered to destroy them and move to the new sites, where they had to live in temporary\nshelters while building new houses. Persons who resisted these orders were fined or\nimprisoned. [18]\n\nThe rebels\u2019 control over the Kivu region in DRC, and the improved security situation\nled to a reduction of incursions of armed infiltrators into North-West Rwanda and a\ncorresponding decline in alleged reprisals by the RPA. However, reports continued of\nthe security services beating suspects, as well as continuing to use arbitrary arrest and\ndetention. [19] Reportedly, 49 persons, mostly women and children, were killed by the\narmy on 4 and 5 May 1999, after fleeing into the Volcano National Park. [20]\n\n# **3. The National Legislative Context**\n\n## **Gacaca**\n\nThroughout 1999, Rwandan authorities discussed the establishment of a new form of\npopular justice based on \u2018gacaca\u2019 a customary system for conflict resolution. Judges would\nbe elected at the level of cell, sector, commune and province. The \u2018gacaca\u2019 courts will have\njurisdiction to decide prosecutions brought against offender in the second, third and fourth\ncategories established in the 1996 Genocide Law [21], over crimes committed since October\n1990. Those accused of crimes from the least serious category, the fourth, would be tried at\nthe cell level, those of category three at the sector level, and those of category two at the\ncommune level. There will be no appeal of decisions taken by the \u2018gacaca\u2019 courts at the cell\nlevel, whereas appeals will be permitted at the level of sector and commune. Appeals would\nbe heard at the level of the province. Those accused of category one crimes would be tried\nin the usual formal court proceedings.\n\nPrisoners will be tried in public before the entire community. Drawing on the recollections\nof the accused and the villagers, the judges will compile a list of those who died in the\ngenocide and of those responsible. The accused will then be judged and sentenced.\n\n\n18 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n19 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n20 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_\n_prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights_, A/54/359, 17 September\n1999.\n21 In the first category of genocide offenders are those who planned and directed the 1994 genocide.\nThe second comprises those who personally killed, acting on orders. The third category is for those\nwho caused physical injury and rape. In the fourth category are those who destroyed property. Each\nprisoner is assigned a category at trial.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "5\n\n\nThe system raised concerns among the international community as it might violate\ninternational human rights standards. The system does not allow for appeals against\ndecisions made by the \u2018gacaca\u2019 courts at the cell level. It also provides no safeguards for the\naccused, such as the right to legal counsel. [22] \u2018Gacaca\u2019 is not a judicial process and even less\nan adversarial system, therefore, human rights observers insist that a way must be found to\nensure that a defendant does not stand alone before his accusers.\n\nOther reasons of concerns are the public nature of the process, which could lead to\nintimidation, and could for example refrain women to give evidence in public about\nsensitive subjects like rape. Concerns have also been expressed by genocide survivors that\nwitnesses might be killed. In addition, there is fear that the release of a large number of selfconfessed _genocidaires_ will bring personal vendettas.\n\nAccording to observers, is difficult to predict what will be the outcome of this process. The\nsystem would entail a traumatic process of recollection that will induce the Hutu population\ninto a collective admission of responsibility. The common reason from peasants who\nadmitted killing their Tutsi neighbors has often been that they did so in the context of the\nwar. Few Hutus have attempted to come to terms with their guilt, partly because they fear\nretaliation from the Tutsis, now in power. [23]\n\n# **4. General Respect for Human Rights**\n\n\nThe human rights situation in Rwanda continues to be affected by the repercussions of\nthe armed conflict of October 1990 to July 1994, which culminated in the genocide\nthat is believed to have taken up to a million lives. It is also linked to the security\nsituation throughout the Great Lakes region.\n\nThe violent conflict in the North-West of the country during 1997, 1998 and partly\n1999, between the Tutsi-led national army and Hutu-militias had contributed to\nexacerbate the division along ethnic line between the Hutu majority and the Tutsi\nminority, since 1994 in power.\n\nThe actions by the RPA in the North-West, in the course of their activities to control\nthe insurgents, increased friction between the security forces and the Hutu population.\nThe RPA used brutal tactics and killed thousands, including civilians, for political and\nsecurity reasons, but also simply as a revenge tactic. [24]\n\nBy the end of 1999, the authorities were believed to be holding more than 130,000\npeople, the majority on suspicion of participation in the genocide, in overcrowded\nprisons where conditions are harsh and even life-threatening.\n\nThe authorities have also harassed and threatened journalists, while political activity\nand freedom of movement are restricted.\n\n\n22 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n23 The Christian Science Monitor, _Rwanda Attempts and Atonement_, 27 January 2000.\n24 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "6\n\n## **Security Forces**\n\nThe security apparatus in Rwanda consists of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) and\nthe Gendarmerie Nationale (GDN), which is largely made up of RPA soldiers. In\naddition, civilian police operates throughout the country. On 21 August 1999, the\ngovernment approved the creation of a new national police force to replace the GDN\nand the Local Defence Force. The initial national police force will be comprised of\n3,500 policemen, who will be selected from the existing soldiers of the GDN, local\ndefence and the public. Those gendarmes who would not be taken on in the new force\nwould have the option of joining the RPA.\n\nOn 3 August 1999, the United Nations Development Program and donor partners\nannounced a $5.5 million programme aimed at strengthening police security in rural\nareas of Rwanda. The programme would provide training and accommodation for\nlocal police.\n\nIn order to improve security at local level, the government revived the so-called Local\nDefence Forces, officially sanctioned paramilitary groups. During 1999, these forces\nincreased to more than 7,000 men. After a brief training, the Local Defence Forces\nare charged with patrolling their neighborhoods to suppress purportedly antigovernment activity, some of them armed with firearms or with machetes. Both Tutsi\nand Hutu are called to serve, some of them against their will. [25] The compulsory\nparticipation in the Local Defence Forces, was one of the claimed reasons for the\nfleeing of refugees to Tanzania in 1998.\n\nThe Special Representative for Rwanda of the Commission of Human Rights, in his\nlatest report, in considering the use of local defense forces urged the government to\nensure that the civil defense patrols be properly controlled and held accountable for\ntheir actions. [26]\n\nAccording to a recent government paper, about 10,000 ex-FAR were absorbed into\nthe army last year.\n\n## **Detention**\n\nDuring the genocide the justice system had completely ceased to function and the\ncapacity of the prison system had been seriously eroded. Tens of thousands of men,\nwomen and children of all ages were arrested and detained in overcrowded prisons\nand communal detention centres (cachots), on suspicion of direct involvement in the\ngenocide or in other crimes against humanity, including massacres perpetrated since\nOctober 1990.\n\nAccording to government statistics, at the end 1999, Rwanda\u2019s overcrowded prisons\nwere accommodating more than 130,000 prisoners, mostly genocide suspects. In\naddition an unknown number were detained in military detention centres to which\naccess to families and other visitors was denied. [27]\n\n25 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n26 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n27 Amnesty International, _Annual Report_, 1999.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "7\n\n\nConditions in many detention centres amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading\ntreatment, due to overcrowding and lack of sanitary facilities. During 1998 more than\n3,300 prisoners died. [28] Conditions in the cachots, the local detention centers, are even\nworst. The cachots are meant to hold detainees for up to 48 hours, until they could be\ntransferred to a prison, in reality detainees had spent years before the transfer could\nmaterialize. According to a report by the League for the Defence of Human Rights in\nRwanda, 85 percent among the cachots population had not been charged. [29] Cases of\ntorture or ill-treatment were also reported, usually at the time of arrest and\ninterrogation, during detention in the cachots and in the military detention centres. [30]\n\nFurthermore, while the right to due process, provided for in Rwanda\u2019s constitution, is\nnot assured, genocide trials continue at such a slow pace that trials for every accused\nperson now held by the authorities are expected to take many years to complete.\n\nIn August 1999, it was announced that more than 1.5 billion Rwandan Francs (4.435\nmillion US dollars) would be spent on feeding those in Rwanda\u2019s overcrowded\nprisons, more than the actual Ministry\u2019s budget. This is down on the 2 billion\nRwandan Francs used in 1998, which the Minister of Justice said had been\ninsufficient and had been supplemented by the International Committee for the Red\nCross (ICRC).\n\nMeasures taken to relieve the pressure on the prisons have proved largely ineffectual.\nOne of these was the provision in the Law on Prosecution for Genocide Offences, of\nAugust 1996, designed to elicit confessions in exchange for reduced sentences for the\nvast majority of those involved in the genocide. Few confessions had been made\nunder the plea bargaining provision of that law, however, the public executions,\nstarted in April 1998, resulted in a sharp increase in the number of applications from\npeople charged with genocide. Because of the slow and cumbersome process of\nhearing confessions and review, only few confessions had been acted upon. [31]\n\nIn a fresh attempt to relieve pressure on the prisons, in October 1998 the government\nannounced plans to release around 10,000 genocide suspects who had no concrete\nevidence against them. Throughout 1999, the government released small numbers of\nsuspects who had incomplete files, or were ill or elderly, and by the end of the year\napproximately 3,500 had been released. However, some of these were subsequently\nrearrested following intense opposition from genocide survivors\u2019 groups, while there\nwere reports of revenge killings of others who had been released. Following the\ncabinet reshuffle on February 1999, the Minister of Justice post was filled by Jean de\nDieu Mucyo, a genocide survivor, giving a clear signal that the government is\nlistening to the protests of genocide survivors and suspects without complete files will\nnow find it harder to obtain their release. [32]\n\n\n28 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n29 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n30 Amnesty International, _Annual Report_, 1999.\n31 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n32 EIU, _Country Report_, 1st Quarter 1999, 12.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "8\n\n\nMeanwhile, the government has undertaken work on new detention centres, which\nremain under construction.\n\nIn addition, due to financial constraints and the increasing numbers of genocide\nsuspects in jails, the Rwandan government has opted for the use of traditional village\ncourts, locally known as \u201cgacaca\u201d, to deal with the backlog of genocide related cases.\n\nIn December 1999, the Parliament approved a law increasing the remand period for\nthose currently in custody on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity. The\ntemporary amendment provided for an 18-month extension of the remand period.\n\n## **Genocide Trials**\n\nThe courts in Rwanda continued to try and sentence genocide suspects throughout\n1999, although at a slow pace. Less than 2,000 persons had been tried since trials\nbegan in December 1996. The plea bargaining provision of the 1996 Law on\nProsecution for Genocide Offences has attracted some 9,000 persons since it entered\ninto force, making little difference in the number of cases resolved. [33] More than 300\npeople have been sentenced to death for genocide crimes, 22 were publicly executed\nin April 1998.\n\nThe judicial system was completely disrupted during the genocide. The management\nof justice has always been not only problematic due to the lack of financial and\nmaterial means, but also highly politicized. Prosecutors, judges and investigators are\npoorly paid and subject to pressure and sometimes to threats from all sides. Persons\nfrom the top to the bottom of society were accused of genocide, anti-Tutsi activities,\nor links to the insurgents whenever personal or political enemies wanted to threaten\nthem. [34]\n\nAccording to the 1996 Genocide Law, the prosecutor of Kigali is charged with\npreparing a list of all persons suspected of crimes that fell in the first of the four\ncategories of possible genocide offenses. A new list was issued in January 2000, it\ncontains 2,133 names, 643 names contained in the first list were removed and 830\nnew names added.\n\nThe International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), criticized for its slowness in\nthe past, in 1999 adopted procedures to expedite trials and established a new panel of\njudges to assist the two already seated.\n\n## **Political Dissidents**\n\nCitizens do not have the right to change their government by democratic means. The\npower-sharing agreement, ratified by the Arusha Accord of 1993, was not fully\nimplemented prior to President Habyarimana's death in April 1994, but it remains the\nbasis of planning. After its military victory in 1994, the RPF brought representatives\nof four opposition parties into the government (MDR, PSD, PL and PCD), but none of\nthese officials were elected. An appointed multi-party national assembly is\nfunctioning with nine political parties represented including the RPF. [35]\n\n33 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n34 Ibid.\n35 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "9\n\n\nPower appears to be concentrated in the hands of a few, all of whom are RPA officers\nor former RPA officers, and any dissent from their authority is not tolerated. After a\nseries of government reshuffles, ministers\u2019 resignation or flight abroad, the legitimacy\nof the Tutsi minority-led government is fragile and undermined by the continuing\ndefections of its Hutu members. [36]\n\nHutus are discouraged from voicing their opinions in the political arena fearing\nretaliation.\n\n## **Freedom of Religion**\n\nApproximately half of the population adheres to traditional animist beliefs, and most\nof the remainders are Roman Catholics, who are estimated to constitute 48% of the\ntotal population. There are also Protestant and Muslim minorities. [37]\n\nThe 1991 constitution provides for freedom of religion and the government generally\nrespects this right. However, priests and nuns have continued to be targeted by\ninsurgents since the 1994 genocide.\n\nThe Church continued to be criticized for its role during the genocide and for not\ntaking a firmer stand against the mass killing, in which some of its clergy have also\nbeen accused of collaboration. On 20 August 1999, the trial against Catholic Bishop\nAugustin Misago began. Misago stands charged with genocide and other crimes\nagainst humanity and faces the death penalty if found guilty. The Vatican sharply\ncriticized the arrest and called for the bishop's release. Misago was the first Catholic\nbishop to be charged with genocide and is being detained at Kigali Central Prison.\n\n## **Freedom of Assembly and Association**\n\nThe constitution provides for freedom of peaceful assembly, but the authorities may\nlegally require advance notice for outdoor rallies, demonstrations and meetings.\nPolitical activity below the level of the executive committees of political parties has\nbeen suspended with the agreement of the parties. The National Revolutionary\nMovement for Democracy and Development (MRNDD) [38] and the Coalition for the\nDefence of the Republic (CDR) [39], both implicated in the planning and execution of\nthe 1994 genocide, have been banned by law.\n\n\n36 European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation, _Rwanda Country Survey_, 1999.\n37 Europa Yearbook 2000.\n38 Mouvement R\u00e9volutionnaire National pour la D\u00e9mocratie et le D\u00e9veloppement, was formed by\nJuv\u00e9nal Habyarimana in 1975, and remained in power until his death in 1994. Sole legal party until\n1991, it drew support from hard line Hutu elements and operates the unofficial militia known as the\n_Interahamwe_ (literally \u2018those who stand together\u2019). Many of its leaders were among the main\norganizers of the genocide. It was banned by the RPF in 1994 from participation in transitional\ngovernment and legislature.\n39 Coalition pour la D\u00e9fense de la R\u00e9publique, was formed in Kigali in 1992. It was an extremist Hutu\norganization, allied to the MRNDD and operated an unofficial militia known as _Impuzamugambi_\n(literally \u2018those who have only one aim\u2019), which together with the _Interahamwe_ participated in the\ngenocide.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "10\n\n\nAs part of the Arusha Accord, the remaining political parties agreed to refrain from\npartisan public debate during the five-year transitional period, due to end in 1999 and\nthen extended for other four years.\n\n## **Freedom of Expression and Media**\n\nWhilst the constitution provides for freedom of the press, the government has at times\nharassed the media, including journalists whose reporting was contrary to official\nviews. One journalist was detained for several months after having criticized a\nmilitary officer in print. Another, incarcerated since 1997, was released in mid-1999.\nA third, critical of the authorities, fled Rwanda early in 1999, saying that his life had\nbeen threatened. [40]\n\nThere are several privately-owned newspapers, the government-owned Radio\nRwanda, and a sporadically operating television station. However, the biggest\nobstacle for the media is the legacy of distrust that persists form the genocide.\n\nA new press law is currently under discussion in the National Assembly.\n\n## **Freedom of Movement**\n\nThe constitution provides for freedom of movement, foreign travel, emigration and\nrepatriation, and the government has generally respected these in practice. However,\nRwandans are linked to their communes by a system of compulsory registration and\nidentity cards. This restricts freedom of movement and it also serves as a barrier to a\nflexible labor market and economic development. [41]\n\nInsurgent warfare and ethnic violence since 1990, which again intensified during 1997\nand 1998, particularly in the North-Western area of Rwanda, exacerbated the problem\nof displaced persons and refugees, and made whole regions virtually inaccessible. In\naddition, the outbreak of the rebellion in the DRC in August 1998 brought a fresh\ninflux of Congolese refugees to Western Rwanda.\n\nRegarding the return of Rwandans refugees from the DRC during 1999, the\ngovernment stated that it believes that up to 2,000 rebels, members of the militia\ngroup umbrella Palir (Peuple en Arme pour Lib\u00e9rer le Rwanda), have entered the\ncountry. Clearly, the RPA regards the last refugees remaining in Congo to be those\nclosely associated with the ex-government and the _Interahamwe_ militia. [42] Local\nhuman rights organizations reported instances of harassment and disappearances of\nnewly arrived returnees from DRC. The Special Representative for Rwanda of the\nCommission on Human Rights reported that according to interviews conducted by the\nLeague for the Defence of Human Rights in Rwanda, eight women and four young\ngirls claim to have been raped by government soldiers at a reception center in Gisenyi.\n\n\n40 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ ; and United Nations Commission on Human Rights,\n_Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_, 17 September 1999.\n41 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n42 EIU, _Country Report_, 4th Quarter 1999, 12.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "11\n\n\nThe League also claims that several returnees have failed to arrive in their\nCommune. [43]\n\nA further development during 1998 was the reported refusal of the Government of\nRwanda to issue its newly devised passport to some citizens, or to allow some citizens\nto leave the country, in contravention of the International Covenant on Civil and\nPolitical Rights, which Rwanda has ratified. [44]\n\n## **Human Rights Organizations, the National Human Rights** **Commission and the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission**\n\nRwandan human rights organizations, weakened by the death or flight into exile of\nsome of their leaders in 1998, grew stronger during 1999. The trial observers team of\nthe Rwandan League for Human Rights (LIPRODHOR) provided a continuing record\nof genocide trials and evaluated the conduct of the proceedings. However, in general\nhuman rights groups do not have basic human rights education, are constrained by\nlack of financial means and are not able to report regularly.\n\nThe National Assembly adopted, in January 1999, the law creating the National\nHuman Rights Commission, which was finally constituted in May 1999. The\ncommission is composed of seven members named by the government and elected by\nthe National Assembly. Only the President and one other member had any previous\nhuman rights experience and government officials outnumbered representatives of the\ncivil society. [45]\n\nAccording to the law, the Commission is independent and has the objective to\ninvestigate and follow up on human rights violations committed by anyone on the\nRwandan territory. In particular, the functions of the Commission are to sensitize and\ntrain the Rwandans population in matters of human rights. In the exercise of their\nduties, the members of the Commission are subject only to the jurisdiction of the\nSupreme Court. [46]\n\nIn October 1999, a public round table was convened by the Commission to facilitate a\nwide exchange of experience and expertise from personalities invited from other\nnational human rights institutions. The Commission will have to elaborate its work\nplan and priorities.\n\nDespite the creation of the Commission for Human Rights, critics remained concerned\nabout human rights violations as they maintained that the government-controlled\ncommission would confine its activities to human rights violations against Tutsis\nwhile ignoring those against Hutus. [47]\n\nThe National Assembly also established the National Commission for Unity and\nReconciliation. Functions of the Commission are to conceive and disseminate ideas\n\n43 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n44 United Kingdom Home Office, _Rwanda Country Assessment_, September 1999.\n45 Human Rights Watch, _World Report 2000_ .\n46 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n47 Europa Regional Surveys of the World, _Africa South of the Sahara_, 2000, 874.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "12\n\n\nand initiatives aimed at promoting peace among Rwandans and to inculcate the\nculture of national unity and reconciliation\n\n## **4.1 Vulnerable Groups**\n\n\n**Ethnic Minorities**\n\nBefore the 1994 genocide, an estimated 85% of citizens were Hutu, 14% were Tutsi,\nand 1% were Batwa. The subsequent mass killings and migrations affected the ethnic\ncomposition of the population, but the extent of the changes is unknown.\n\nTutsis who survived the genocide continued to face a very different situation\ncompared to those returned from exiles, who have managed to secure privileged\npositions in the towns. While the government is described as a Tutsi regime, the\ndisparity between the urban and rural dwellers is striking, and the new power elite of\nthe towns has little to do with the poor rural Tutsi.\n\nHutus continued to be attacked indiscriminately. Despite the government's public\ncommitment to ethnic reconciliation, the precarious security situation, particularly in\nNorth-Western Rwanda, had led many Tutsis, especially in the RPA, to attack Hutus\nindiscriminately in any repressive operation after an insurgent attack. Even Hutu\ncivilian administrators, chosen by the present government, have been threatened or\ndismissed from their posts as suspected accomplices in attacks. Returning Hutu\nrefugees appear to have been branded with a collective guilt for the genocide. The\nHutu insurgents were reported to have pressed-ganged hundreds of their own ethnic\ngroup into death squads, killing those who refuse to join, which underlines the\noverriding political motivation of the insurgency.\n\nHutu returnees continued to be subject to a high level of control and the reintegration\nprocess seems to be proceeding very slowly. In such circumstances of increased\nsegregation, there seems little hope of ethnic reconciliation and an integrated\nsociety. [48]\n\n\n**Women and Children**\n\nViolence against women has continued since the 1994 genocide. [49]\n\nWife-beating and domestic violence are normally handled within the context of the\nextended family and rarely come before the courts. Despite constitutional provisions,\nwomen also continue to face serious discrimination. They have only limited\nopportunities for education, employment and promotion, while the absence of\nsuccession laws limits a woman\u2019s right to property, thus jeopardizing her status and\nability to provide for her family should she survive her husband. This omission has\nbeen particularly burdensome since the genocide, as widows are very numerous and\nsurviving male relatives, who would normally inherit and provide for them, are\nrelatively few.\n\nMore than 50,000 children were separated from their parents during the 1994\ngenocide and national upheaval. Many who are still children remain in the care of\n\n\n48 United Kingdom Home Office, _Rwanda Country Assessment_, September 1999.\n49 USDOS, _1998 Country Report on Human Rights Practices_, Rwanda.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "13\n\n\nfoster families or international organizations. According to government figures 85,000\nchildren have become head of household after the genocide.\n\nAlthough the penal code prohibits the imprisonment of children with adults, there are\nhundreds of children incarcerated with adults throughout the prison system, in\nconditions which are said to be harsh and even life-threatening.\n\nChildren have also been affected by ongoing hostilities primarily in the North-West of\nRwanda. Women and children were also believed to be among the Hutu militia\nresponsible for these atrocities. The Rwandan government has accused the rebels of\nforcing children into operating their complex propaganda and courier system, thereby\nexploiting the children's knowledge of particular areas and their ability to avoid\ngovernment lines.\n\n# **5. The Villagisation Policy**\n\n\nIn 1997, the government started the implementation of the \u2018villagisation\u2019 policy,\nwhich consist in resettling Rwandans returned from outside the country and the\ninternally displaced in villages, called _imidugudu,_ refusing to allow them to live in the\ndispersed homes customary in Rwanda. According to the government, this policy\nwould promote economic development and improve delivery of services to the\npopulation. It would also be easier to organize security for the population. The 1993\nArusha peace accords had also introduced the concept of villagisation for the\nreturning refugees who had been living in exile for many years.\n\nConcerns were raised by the international donor community, citing reports of coerced\nrelocations, disappointing experiences in other countries and a lack of population\nparticipation in the process. [50] According to a study published by Wageningen\nUniversity in the Netherlands, populations had little or no choice to regroup, with\nfines imposed on non-participants. The study concluded that the government \u201chad\nhidden aims\u201d and \u201cits compulsory nature could contribute to long term social\ntension\u201d. [51] The donors stressed the need for planning, popular consultations and for\nequitable distribution of land in order to avoid human rights violations. Another\nconcern is agricultural productivity and food security. A recent survey by the\ngovernment and United Nations agencies suggests that the distance from the new sites\nto the fields is contributing to an alarming fall in food production and that only 53\npercent of the respondents were able to farm its own land. [52]\n\nIn the North-West, where the major concerns about the policy were raised, the\ngovernment continued its controversial villagisation programme, which involves\nforced settlement of displaced people in rural towns. [53] About 620,000 people\ndisplaced by the conflict were resettled in 351 _imidugudu_ sites.\n\n\n50 IRIN, _Focus on Villagisation_, 13 October 1999.\n51 Ibid.\n52 United Nations Commission on Human Rights, _Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda_,\n17 September 1999.\n53 EIU, _Country Report_, 1st Quarter 1999, 7.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "14\n\n\nAt the end of 1999, about 94 percent of the population of Kibungo province, 60\npercent of Umutara, 40 percent of Kigali Rural, and smaller numbers in other areas\nare living in _imidugudu_ sites. [54]\n\nDespite the resistance of the international community, according to analysts, once the\nvillages are in place and their needs become apparent, the international assistance will\nprobably start \u201cwith donors arguing that the villagisation is a _fait accompli_ in which\nthey had no hand and that humanitarian concerns are paramount.\u201d [55]\n\n\n54 IRIN, _Focus on Villagisation_, 13 October 1999.\n55 EIU, Country Report, 1st Quarter 1999, 7.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/03590e89-b949-3279-8090-29fe77ac119d/5A90CEF120119A91852569140066B949-rwanda00.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_117/raw/doc_117_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,129 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "## **\u0646\u0638\u0631\u0629 \u0639\u0627\u0645\u0629**\n\n\n\n**\u0645\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063193 \u0628\u0645\u0628\u0644\u0640\u063a \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644\u0640\u064a \u0642\u062f\u0631\u0647** - **[\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646\u0648](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/operations/yemen)** **[\u0627\u0644\u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a\u0640\u0629 (\u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a\u0640\u0627)](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/operations/syrian-arab-republic)**\n\n. **\u062d\u062a\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u0646**\n\n\n\u0649 **\u0640** \u0627\u0636 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0644\u0646\u062e\u0641\u0644\u064a\u0644 \u0623\u062b\u0631 \u0647\u0630\u0627 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0644\u062a\u0642 **\u0640** \u0627\u0631\u0649 \u062c\u0647\u062f\u0647 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0642\u0635 **\u0640** \u0648\u062a\u0628\u0630\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\n\u0649 **\u0640** \u0627\u0621\u0629 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0646\u0648\u0627\u0635\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u062d\u062b \u0639\u0646 \u0637\u0631\u0642 \u0644\u0646\u0643\u0648\u0646 \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0643\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u062c\u064a\u0646\u060c \u0643\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062d\u062a\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0645\u064a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0648\u0629 \u0628\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0640\u0640\u0639\u0627\u062c\u0644 \u0625\u0644\u0649 \u062d\u0634\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644\n\n\n\u0648\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0630\u0644\u0643\u060c \u0641\u0640\u0640\u0625\u0646 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u064a\u0632\u0627\u0646\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0633\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0631\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0642\u0633\u0631\u064b\n\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0639\u0648\u0627\u0645\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644 **\u0640** \u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u0646\u064a **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** \u0647\u0645 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0636\u064a\u0641 **\u0640** \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\n\u0629. **\u0640** \u0627\u0637\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u062f\u0629 \u0645\u062e **\u0640** \u0642\u0631\u060c \u0648\u0632\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0639 \u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u0641\u060c \u0648\u0627\u0631\u062a\u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639\n\u0644\u0645\u0648\u0633\u060c \u0648\u062a\u062a\u0632\u0627\u064a\u062f **\u0640** \u0629 \u0628\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0644\u0635 \u0645\u062c **\u0640** \u0649 \u0630\u0644\u0643\u060c \u0633\u064a\u062a\u0642 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0625\u0636\u0627\u0641\n\u062d\u0631\u0643\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0632\u0648\u062d\u060c \u0628\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0639\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0647\u062c\u0631\u0629 \u063a\u064a\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0638\u0627\u0645\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\n\u0648\u0627\u0644\u062e\u0637\u064a\u0631\u0629 \u0639\u0646 \u0637\u0631\u064a\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u062d\u0631\u060c \u0643\u0644 \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0623\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u064a\u0646\u0627\u0645\u064a\u0643\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a\n\u0627\u0644\u062c\u064a\u0648\u0633\u064a\u0627\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0633\u064a\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0623\u062c\u0632\u0627\u0621 \u0645\u0646 \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637\n\u0648\u0634\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0627\u0644 \u062a\u0632\u0627\u0644 \u062f\u0648\u0646 \u062d\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0648\u0644\u060c \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0622\u062b\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0631 \u0628\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062f\u0649 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649\n\u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0644\u064a\u0645\u064a\u064a\u0646\u0627\u0644\u0633\u0627\u0644\u0645 \u0648\n\n\n\n\u060c \u0627\u0646\u062e\u0640\u0640\u0641\u0636 \u062f\u062e\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0645\u064a\u0629 \u0644\u0623\u0644\u0645\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u062d\u062f\u06292023 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0645\n\u0644\u0634\u0624\u0648\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 (\u201c\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u201d) \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644\u0645 \u0628\u0646\u062d\u0648 \u0645\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0631\n\u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0637\u0648\u0627\u0631\u0626 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631\u060c \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u063a\u0645 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0633\u062a\u062c\u0627\u0628\u062a\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0644\u062d\u0640\u0640\n\u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u062c\u0645\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0639\u0634\u0631\u064a\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0646\u0645\u0648 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0645\u0631 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0639\u062f\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0642\u0633\u0631\u064b\n\u0627\u0630 \u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631\u0627\u062a **\u0640** \u0649 \u0627\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0629 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644\u0630\u0644\u0643\u060c \u0627\u0636\u0637\u0631\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0645. \u0648\u0646\u062a\u064a\u062c **\u0640** \u0627\u0621 \u0627\u0644\u0639 **\u0640** \u0623\u0646\u062d\n\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u062d\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0627\u0629 \u0627\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0639\u062f\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646\u0635\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0628\u0629 \u0628\u0640\u0640\u0634\u0623\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u064a\u0632\u0627\u0646\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0623\u062b\u0631\u062a \u0640\u0640\u0633\u0644\u0628\u064b\n\n\n\u0648\u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u063a\u0645 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u062e\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0646\u062d\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c\n\u0647 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f 2024 \u062a\u0634\u064a\u0631 \u062a\u0648\u0642\u0639 **\u0640** \u0629 \u062a\u0648\u0627\u062c **\u0640** \u0649 \u0623\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0625\u0644 \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0644\u0639 **\u0640**\n\u0644\u0646\u062e\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0636\u060c \u062d\u064a\u062b \u062a\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0642\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0627\u0628\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0644\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0645\u0646 \u0647\u0630\u0627\n\u0627\u0646/\u0623\u0628\u0631\u064a\u0644\u060c **\u0640** \u0629 \u0646\u064a\u0633 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0646\u0647\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u060c \u062d\u062a **\u0640** \u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645 **\u0640** \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\n\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631 2,341 \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0637 \u0645\u0646 \u0623\u0635\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0640256.4 **\u0640**\n)11%( \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0637\u0644\u0648\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0625\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0645 \u0645\u0647\u0627\u0645\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627\n\n\n**\u062e\u0640\u0641\u0636 \u0646\u0641\u0642\u0627\u062a\u0647\u0640\u0627 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0640\u0642\u0631\u0631\u0629 \u0628\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0643\u0628\u064a\u0631** \u0648\u0642\u062f \u0627\u0636\u0637\u0631\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649\n**[\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0645\u0647\u0648\u0631\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0631\u0628\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u0648](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/operations/syrian-arab-republic)** **[\u0644\u0628\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0646\u0648](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/operations/lebanon)** **[\u0644\u0631\u062f\u0646\u0627](https://reporting.unhcr.org/operational/operations/jordan)** \u0648\u0647\u0640\u0640\u064a- \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0623\u0631\u0628\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0628\u0640\u0640\u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646\n\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/945ad768-f289-4247-bf32-f494470c1c15/%5BAR%5D%20Impact%20of%20funding%20cuts%20on%20MENA%20operations.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629\n\u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627\n\n\n## **\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0642\u0637\u0631\u064a\u0629** **\u0644\u0628\u0646\u0627\u0646**\n\n\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063127.8 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\n**\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0629** \u0649 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u064a \u0644\u0628\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n\n**\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631545.2** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **16%**\n\n\n\n\u0649 **\u0640** \u064a \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0631\u064a\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0624\u0633\u0633 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u0634 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0641 **\u0640** \u0633\u062a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\n\u0629 **\u0640** \u064a \u0648\u0627\u0625\u0644\u0642\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0633\u062c\u064a\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062f\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u062d\u0635\u0648\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0625\u0639\u0627\u0642\n\u0627\u0637\u0631 \u0634\u062f\u064a\u062f\u0629 **\u0640** \u0627 \u064a\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0645\u062e **\u0640** \u0627\u0633\u0628\u060c \u0645\u0645 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0642\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0642\u0627\u0646\u0648\u0646\u064a\n\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629\n\n\n\n\u0639\u062f 115,000 \u0633\u062a\u062e\u0633\u0631 **\u0640** \u064a\u060c \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0630\u064a \u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0627\u0644\u0645 **\u0640** \u062c \u0627\u0623\u0644\u063a\u0630\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0648\u0628\u0631\u0646\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0642\u062f\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0634\u062a\u0631\u0643 \u0628\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u062c \u0627\u0644\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0631\u0646\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626 **\u0640** \u0639\u0627\u0626\u0644\n\u0639 \u062a\u0632\u0627\u064a\u062f \u0623\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062f 2023 \u0639\u0646 \u0639 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0645 **\u0640** \u060c \u062d\u062a \u0627\u064540% \u0634\u0631\u064a **\u0640** \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0628 **\u064b\u0640** \u0627 \u064a\u0645\u062b\u0644 \u0627\u0646\u062e\u0641\u0627 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u062f\u060c \u0648\u0647\u0648 \u0645 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0626\u0627\u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626 **\u0640** \u0627\u0629 \u0644\u0644\u0639 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u064a **\u0640**\n\u0627 **\u0640** \u0627\u0621\u060c \u0645\u0645 **\u0640** \u0641\u0635\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u062a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a **\u0640** \u062c \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0648\u0642\u0641 \u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0639\u0644 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0627\u0636\u0637\u0631\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u0646. \u0643\u0645 **\u0640** \u064a \u0644\u0628\u0646 **\u0640** \u0642\u0631 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0639\u064a\u0646 \u062a\u062d\u062a \u062e\u0637 \u0627\u0644\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0627\u0642\n\u0623\u062f\u0649 \u0625\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u062a\u0640\u0640\u0641\u0627\u0642\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0636\u063a\u0648\u0637 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u062e\u0627\u0644\u0644 \u0623\u0640\u0640\u0634\u0647\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0627\u0621 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0628\u0627\u0631\u062f\u0629\n\n\n\u0649 40% \u062a\u0645 \u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0627 \u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0641\u0649\u060c \u0645\u0645 **\u0640** \u0645\u0646 \u0641\u0648\u0627\u062a\u064a\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0634 \u0649 **\u0640** \u0627 \u064a\u0635\u0644 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0639 \u0645 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u0646 \u062f\u0641 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u062d\u064a\u062b \u064a\u062c\u0628 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0635\u062d\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u0639\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0641\u064a\u0636 \u062a\u063a\u0637\u064a **\u0640**\n\u062d\u0635\u0648\u0644 \u0639\u062f\u062f \u0623\u0642\u0644 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0639\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u0639\u0627\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0627\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0628\u0629 \u0648\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0623\u062c\u064a\u0644 \u0627\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0639\u0627\u0644\u062c \u0627\u0644\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0628\u064a\n\n\n\u0644\u0633\u062a\u062c\u0627\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0628\u0633\u0631\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0641\u0639\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0633\u064a\u062a\u0645 \u062a\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0635 \u0642\u062f\u0631\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0644\u0628\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0646 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0625\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062f\u0629 \u062a\u062e\u0632\u064a\u0646 \u0625\u0645\u062f\u0627\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0637\u0648\u0627\u0631\u0626\u060c \u0645\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u064a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a\u0642 \u0642\u062f\u0631\u062a\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649\n\u0644\u0623\u0644\u0632\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0637\u0627\u0631\u0640\u0640\u0626\u0629\n## **\u0644\u0631\u062f\u0646\u0627**\n\n\n\n\u0629 **\u0640** \u0627\u0626\u0627\u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626 **\u0640** \u0641\u0636 \u0639\u062f\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0639 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646/ \u0623\u0628\u0631\u064a\u0644\u060c \u0627\u0646\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u0646\u064a\u0633 **\u0640** \u062d\u062a\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063128 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\u0627\u0633\u064a\u0629 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644\u0627\u0644\u062d\u062a\u064a\u0627\u062c **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a **\u0640** \u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u064a \u062a\u062a\u0644\u0642 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u062a\n\u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0637\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0636\u0631\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u062d\u064a\u062b \u064a\u0640\u0640\u0642\u064a\u0645\n\n**\u0639\u0644\u0640\u0649 \u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0629** \u064a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0631\u062f\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n\n\u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646\u060c \u0628\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0642\u062f\u0627\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u062b\u0640\u0640\u0644\u062b \u062a\u0642\u0631\u064a\ufffd\u0628\u0640\u064b\u0627\u060c \u0645\u0646 82%\n\n**\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631374.8** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** **16%**\n\n\u0639\u0627\u0626\u0644\u0641\u064a\u063623,500  \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0633\u064a\u062a\u0645 \u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0629. \u0643\u0645 **\u0640** \u064930,000 **\u0640**\n. \u062d\u062a\u0627\u064a\u064825% \u0645\u0628\u0644 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628 **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a **\u0640** \u063a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640**\n\u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a\u064a\u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u0638\u0631\u0648\u0641 70% \u0648\u062a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0647\u0630\u0647 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u062a\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0642\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0631\u062f\u064a \u0628\u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0633 \u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646: \u0625\u0630 \u064a\u0639\u0627\u0646\u0640\u0640\u064a\n\u064b **\u0640** \u0629 \u062a\u0642\u0631\u064a\u0628 **\u0640** \u0639 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626 **\u0640** \u064a \u062c\u0645\u064a **\u0640** \u0627 \u0648\u062a\u0639\u0627\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629. \u0643\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u062a\u064a **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0646\u064a **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062a\u0647\u0648\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u0621\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0627\u0633\u0628 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0636 **\u0640** \u0642\u0631\u0648\u0646 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u062f\u0648\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u0649\u060c \u0648\u064a\u0641\u062a **\u0640** \u0645\u0639\u064a\u0634\u064a\n\u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0631\u0627\u0643\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0647 \u0639\u0644\u064a\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627\u060c \u0648\u062a\u0644\u062c\u0640\u0640\u0623\n\u0629 89% **\u0640** \u0627\u0637\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0636\u0631\u064a **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0645\u0646\u0647\n\u060c\u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0633\u062a\u0631\u0627\u062a\u064a\u062c\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0643\u064a\u0641 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0628\u064a\u0629\n\u0645\u062b\u0644 \u062a\u0633\u0648\u0644 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0641\u0627\u0644 \u0645\u0646 \u0623\u062c\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0627\u0621\n\n\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063128 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\n\n**\u0639\u0644\u0640\u0649 \u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0629** \u064a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0631\u062f\u0646 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n\n\n\n**\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631374.8** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** **16%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\u0629 \u0648\u0625\u0635\u0627\u0644\u062d **\u0640** \u062c \u0635\u064a\u0627\u0646 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0635 \u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0633\u064a\u062a\u0645 \u062a\u0642\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0623\u0648\u0649 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062e\u064a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0628\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0643\u0628\u064a\u0631\u060c\n\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0627 \u0633\u064a\u0624\u062b\u0631 \u0639\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u062d\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0627\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646\n\n\n\u0623\u064a\u0636\u0640\u0640\u064b \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0633\u064a\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a\u0646\n\u062a\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0635 \u062e\u062f\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u0628\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a\n\u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0644\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062c\u064a\u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0646\u0641 \u0627\u0644\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0626\u0645 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649\n\u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0625\u0636\u0627\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a\u060c \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0648\u0639\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0631\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0646\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0644 \u062e\u062f\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0634\u0640\u0640\u0641\u064a\u0627\u062a \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062e\u064a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0645\u0646\n\u062e\u0627\u0631\u062c\u0640\u0640\u0647\u0627\n\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/945ad768-f289-4247-bf32-f494470c1c15/%5BAR%5D%20Impact%20of%20funding%20cuts%20on%20MENA%20operations.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629\n\u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627\n\n\n## **\u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a\u0627**\n\n\n\n\u0629 **\u0640** \u0627\u062f\u0629 \u0646\u0627\u062c\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u062d **\u0640** \u0629 \u0625\u0646\u0633 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0623\u0632\u0645 **\u0640** \u0649 \u062d\u0627\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0642\u0641 \u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a **\u0640** \u062a\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063119.4 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\u0644\u0642\u062a\u0635\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062f\u064a \u0648\u062a\u0641\u0634\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0644\u0646\u0647\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0631 \u0639\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0632\u0627\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0644\u062d \u0648\n\u0627\u0623\u0644\u0645\u0631\u0627\u0636 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0632\u0627\u0644\u0632\u0644 \u0648\u062a\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0624\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062e\u062f\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0627\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0629.\n\n**\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0629** \u0649 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u064a \u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n\n\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0622\u0644\u0627\u0644\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646 \u0645\u0626 **\u0640** \u0649 \u062d\u0631\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0633\u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0639\u062f\u0645 \u0643\u0641\u0627\u064a\n\n. **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631466.6** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** **10%**\n\n\u0627 \u064a\u0632\u064a\u062f **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629\u060c \u0645\u0645 **\u0640** \u0641\u064a\u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u0627\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639 **\u0640** \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0634\u062e\n\u0649 **\u0640** \u0627\u0631 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0623\u062b\u064a\u0631 \u0636 **\u0640** \u0627\u062f\u0631\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u062f. \u0648\u0633\u064a\u0643\u0648\u0646 \u0644\u0630\u0644\u0643 \u062a **\u0640** \u0649 \u0645\u063a **\u0640** \u0627\u0635 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0634\u062e **\u0640** \u064a\u060c \u0648\u062f\u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0627\u0633\u0643 **\u0640** \u0642\u0648\u064a\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u062a **\u0640** \u0627\u0637\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0645\u0646 \u0645\u062e\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0627\u062a \u0648\u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u062a\u064a \u062a\u0645\u0643\u0646\u062a\u060c \u0628\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0645\u062a\u0648\u0627\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0629 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0648\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u060c \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0627\u0621 \u0640\u0640\u0641\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u062f\u060c \u0639\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u063a\u0645 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u062f\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0647\u0627\u0626\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0629\n\n\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063119.4 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\n\n**\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0629** \u0649 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u064a \u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n. **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631466.6** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** **10%**\n\n\n\n\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u062f. \u0648\u0642\u062f \u0623\u062f\u0649 20% \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628 **\u0640** \u0627\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0632\u0627\u064a\u062f\u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0646\u0633 **\u0640** \u0644\u062d\u062a\u064a\u0627\u062c\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u063a\u0645 \u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0639\u0644 \u06292024 \u062e **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0644\u0639 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0648\u0623\u0646\u0634\u0637\u062a\u0647 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0645\u064a\u0632\u0627\u0646\u064a\u062a\u0647 **\u0640** \u0641\u0636\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640**\n\u0629 **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u0623\u0648\u0649 \u0648\u0645\u0648\u0627\u062f \u0627\u0625\u0644\u063a\u0627\u062b **\u0640** \u0629 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0645 **\u0640** \u0644\u0643 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0639\u0644\u0642 **\u0640** \u0627\u0633\u064a\u0629\u060c \u0645\u062b\u0644 \u062a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0635 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0646\u0634\u0637 **\u0640** \u0641\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u064a\u062f\u0627\u0646\u064a\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u062a\u0642 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u062f\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0648\u0638 **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0642 **\u0640** \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0625\u0644\n\u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a \u0648\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0633\u0628\u0644 \u0643\u0633\u0628 \u0627\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0639\u064a\u0634\n\n\n\u0649 60,000 \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0625\u0644 \u0642\u0631\u0628 \u0645\u0646225,000 \u0628\u0633\u0628\u0628 \u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0627 \u064a **\u0640** \u0642\u0631 \u0645 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u0633\u064a\u0641\u062a **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u0649 \u062e\u062f\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0644\u0646 \u064a\u062d\u0635\u0644 \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u064a\u0632\u0627\u0646\u064a **\u0640**\n\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 47,000 \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0628\u062f\u0648\u0646 \u0645\u0633 \u0649 \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646130,000 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u0633\u064a\u0628\u0642 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0645\u0648\u0627\u062f \u0627\u0625\u0644\u063a\u0627\u062b **\u0640** \u0623\u0648\u0649\u060c \u0648\u0644\u0646 \u064a\u062d\u0635\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062c **\u0640** \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0641 **\u0640**\n\u0644\u0642\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0635\u0627\u062f\u064a10,000 \u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0634\u064a \u0648 \u064a **\u0640** \u0641\u064a\u062f \u062d\u0648\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0648\u0644\u0646 \u064a\u0633\u062a **\u0640**\n\n## **\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646**\n\n\n\n\u062d\u062a\u0649 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u06462024 \u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u062c \u0639\u0627\u0645 **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u063118.2 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0642\u064a\u0645\u0629**\n\n\n**\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0640\u0629** \u0649 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u064a\u0648\u060c \u062d\u0635 **\u0640** \u0623\u064a\u0627\u0631/\u06458 \u062d\u062a\u062e **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0627\u0631\u064a **\u0640**\n. **\u0645\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0631354.4** \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062a\u0637\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** **11%**\n\n\n\n\u0625\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0643\u0628\u064a\u0631\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0639\u0644\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0646\u0632\u0648\u062d \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a\n\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646 \u062a\u062c\u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0647 \u0645\u0646 \u0628\u064a\u0646 \u0623\u0633\u0648\u0623 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0632\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0646\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a\n\u0641\u0648\u0641 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062f\u0646\u064a\u064a\u0646\u060c **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0641\u064a \u0635 **\u0640** \u0639 \u0628\u0625\u0635\u0627\u0628 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0645. \u0648\u064a\u062a\u0633\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0636 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0639\n\u0648\u0646\u0632\u0648\u062d \u0648\u0627\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0642 \u0648\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0641\u062a\u0631\u0627\u062a \u0637\u0648\u064a\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u0648\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0647\u0645\u064a\u0634\n\u0627\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a \u0648\u0627\u0642\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0635\u0627\u062f\u064a\n\n\n\n\u0627\u062e 2023 \u0627\u0644\u062c **\u0640** \u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0632\u0648\u062d \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0631\u062a\u0628\u0637 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u060c \u0627\u0631\u062a\u0641 \u0627\u064571.000 \u0645 **\u0640** \u064a \u0639 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646. \u0648\u0641 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644\u0628 \u0644\u062c\u0648\u0621 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0626 \u0648\u0637 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d \u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644\ufffd\u064a\u0640\u064b\u0627 \u06484.5 \u064a\u0648\u062c\u062f \u062d\u0627\u0644\ufffd\u064a\u0640\u064b\u0627 **\u0640**\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0628\u0642\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0628\u0633\u0628\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0635\u0631\u0627\u063924% \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u064076% \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u064a \u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0643\u0627\u0646\u062a \u0646\u0633\u0628 **\u0640** \u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u062f\u062f\u060c \u0641 **\u0640** \u0627 \u064a\u0645\u062b\u0644 **\u0640** \u0639 \u0633\u0646\u0648\u0627\u062a\u060c \u0628\u0645 **\u0640** \u0647 \u0645\u0646\u0630 \u0623\u0631\u0628 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u0649 \u0644 **\u0640** \u0649 \u0623\u0639\u0644 **\u0640**\n\n\n\u060c \u0645\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0633\u064a\u0624\u062b\u0631 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 25% \u060c \u0633\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0648\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646 \u0628\u062a\u062e\u0640\u0640\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645\u0640\u0640\u062c \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062e\u0627\u0635\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0628\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0628\u0646\u0633\u0628\u0640\u0640\u06292024 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0645\n\u0641\u0631\u062f) \u062a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062a\u0645\u062f \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0645\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u063a\u0631\u0627\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0630\u0629 \u0644\u0644\u062d\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0629. \u0628\u0627\u0625\u0644\u0636\u0627\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0630\u0644\u0643\u060c \u0641\u0640\u0640\u0625\u0646 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0633\u0631 140,000( \u0623\u0633\u0631\u062920,000\n\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639\u0641\u0627\u062a **\u0640** \u0627\u0621 \u0645\u062b\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0637\u0627\u0646\u064a **\u0640** \u0641\u0635\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u062a **\u0640** \u0649 \u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0644 **\u0640** \u0627\u0631\u062f\u0629\u060c \u0644\u0646 \u062a\u062d\u0635\u0644 \u0639\u0644 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0628 **\u0640** \u0627\u0637\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0628\u0644\u064a **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0644\u0643 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0648\u062c\u0648\u062f\u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u062a **\u0640** \u0627 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0629 \u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644\ufffd\u064a\u0640\u064b\u0627\u060c \u0628\u0645 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0627\u0632\u062d **\u0640**\n\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0633 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u062a\u0648\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629\n\n\n\u064a 16.4 \u0633\u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u062a\u0636 **\u0640** \u0627 \u0641 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646\u060c \u0628\u0645 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0645 \u0627\u0629 \u0644\u0646\u062d\u0648 **\u0640** \u0642\u0630\u0629 \u0644\u0644\u062d\u064a **\u0640** \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 **\u0640** \u0627\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a **\u0640** \u064a \u0645\u062c **\u0640** \u0629 \u0641 **\u0640** \u0647\u0648\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0642\u0648\u064a\u0636 \u062c **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a **\u0640** \u0627\u0624\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0648\u0627\u0631\u062f \u0625\u0644 **\u0640**\n\u0627\u062a **\u0640** \u0629\u060c \u0645\u062b\u0644 \u0639\u0645\u0644\u064a **\u0640** \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u064a\u0648\u064a **\u0640** \u064a \u0644\u0644\u062e\u062f\u0645 **\u0640** \u0627\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u063a\u0631\u0627\u0641 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0637 **\u0640** \u0649 \u062a\u0642 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0625\u0644 **\u0640** . \u0648\u0627\u0636\u0637\u0631\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u064b **\u0640** \u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644\u064a **\u0640** \u0644\u062c\u0648\u0621 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0646 **\u0640** \u064a \u0627\u0644 **\u0640** \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0637\u0627\u0644\u0628\n\u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0642\u0627\u0646\u0648\u0646\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629\u0645\u0631\u0627\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0628\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0633\u064a \u0648\n\u0629 **\u0640** \u0629 \u0644\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a **\u0640** \u0623\u0648\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0627\u0628\u0639 **\u0640** \u062c \u0627\u0644\u0645 **\u0640** \u0644\u064a\u0635 \u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645 **\u0640** \u0625\u0646 \u062a\u0642\n66,000 \u064a\u0639\u0646\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0623\u0646 \u062d\u0648\u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d \u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u064b\n\u0633\u064a\u0633\u062a\u0645\u0631\u0648\u0646 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a\u0634 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0638\u0631\u0648\u0641 \u062f\u0648\u0646\n\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0623\u064a \u064a\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u0648\u0633\u0648\u0641 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0645\u062b\u0644. \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u0649\n\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0633\u0628\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u064a\u0634\u060c \u0648\u0645\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062f\u0631\u0627\u062a \u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0648\u062f\u0629\n\u0627\u0644\u0637\u0648\u0639\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0644\u0642\u0627\u0626\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u0648\u0623\u0646\u0634\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u062f\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062c\u060c \u0645\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\n\u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a \u064a\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0636\u0640\u0640\u063a\u0637 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0631\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0647\n\u0644\u0642\u062a\u0635\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062f\u064a \u0644\u0643\u0644 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0648\n\u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u064b\u0627 \u0640\u0640\u0641\u064a \u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644\u063a\u06292024 \u0645\u0646 \u0625\u062c\u0645\u0627\u0644",
-          "confidence": 0.5076964497566223,
-          "start": 473,
-          "end": 476
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0642\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629",
-          "confidence": 0.6757298707962036,
-          "start": 1221,
-          "end": 1223
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0645\u0646",
-          "confidence": 0.8280169367790222,
-          "start": 1207,
-          "end": 1208
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/945ad768-f289-4247-bf32-f494470c1c15/%5BAR%5D%20Impact%20of%20funding%20cuts%20on%20MENA%20operations.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629\n\u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627\n\n## **\u0627\u0622\u0644\u062b\u0627\u0631 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0648\u064a\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0642\u0644\u064a\u0645\u064a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0639\u0627\u0644\u0645\u064a**\n\n#### \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0632\u0648\u062d \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0643\u0631\u0631\u060c \u0640 \u0642\u0648\u0645\u0648\u0646 \u0628 \u0640 \u0627\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0630\u064a\u0646 \u064a \u0640 \u064a \u0639\u062f\u062f \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0634\u062e \u0640 \u0629 \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u062f\u0629 \u0645\u0644\u062d\u0648\u0638 \u0640 \u0629 \u0632\u064a \u0640 \u0647\u062f\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642 \u0640 \u0634 \u0632\u064a\u0640\u0627\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u0631\u0643\u0627\u062a \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0649 \u0648\u062c\u0647\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0623\u062e\u0631\u0649:\n##### \u063a\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0638\u0631 \u0639\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u062e. \u0648\u0628 \u0640 \u063a\u064a\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u062a \u0640 \u0627 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0643\u0645 \u0623\u0648 \u062a\u062f\u0627\u0639\u064a \u0640 \u0642\u0631 \u0623\u0648 \u0642\u0636\u0627\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u062f \u0623\u0648 \u0627\u0644\u0641 \u0640 \u0644\u0636\u0637\u0647\u0627\u0631\u064a\u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0635\u0631\u0627\u0639 \u0623\u0648  \u0640 \u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0641\u0631\u0627\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0641 \u0640 \u0627 \u0641 \u0640 \u0628\u0645 \u0627\u0631 \u0640 \u0644\u062a\u062c\u0629 \u0648 \u0640 \u063a\u0627\u0644\u0644 \u0648\u0633\u0648\u0621 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u0627\u0645\u0644 \u0640 \u0644\u0633\u062a\u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643  \u0640 \u0627 \u0641 \u0640 \u0629 \u062e\u0637\u064a\u0631\u0629\u060c \u0628\u0645 \u0640 \u0627\u0637\u0631 \u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u0635 \u0645\u062e \u0640 \u0647 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0634\u062e \u0640 \u0641\u0632\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u0631\u0643\u060c \u064a\u0648\u0627\u062c \u0640 \u063a\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0638\u0631 \u0639\u0646 \u0645\u062d \u0640 \u0628 \u0640\u0640\u0628\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0634\u0631 \u0623\u062b\u0640\u0640\u0646\u0627\u0621 \u062a\u0646\u0642\u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0647\u0645 \u0647\u0630\u0647 \u0627 \u0640 \u0627\u0646 \u0648\u0625\u0633\u0628\u0627\u0646\u064a \u0640 \u0627 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u0640 \u0649 \u0625\u064a\u0637\u0627\u0644\u064a \u0640 \u0625\u0644 \u0623\u0644\u0641 \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0639\u0646 \u0637\u0631\u064a\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u062d\u063140 \u0648\u0635\u0644 \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646 \u060c2024 \u062e\u0627\u0644\u0644 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0634\u0627\u0645 \u0640 \u0649 \u0645\u0646 \u0639 \u0640 \u0629 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0644 \u0640 \u0647\u0631 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0631\u0628\u0639 \u0640 \u0629 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0640 \u0642\u0648\u064a\u0636 \u0642\u062f\u0631\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a \u0640 \u0649 \u062a \u0640 \u0642\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 . \u0648\u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u062f\u0648\u0644 \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0640\u0627 \u0648\u062a\u0631\u0643\u064a\u0640\u0627 \u0627 \u0640 \u0648\u0642\u0628\u0631\u0635 \u0648\u0645\u0627\u0644\u0637 \u0627\u0631\u0627\u062a \u0640 \u0627\u0621 \u0645\u0633 \u0640 \u0649 \u0625\u0646\u0634 \u0640 \u0629 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 \u0647\u0648\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0631\u0627\u0645\u064a \u0640 \u0639\u064a\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u062c \u0640 \u0647\u0645. \u0648\u0647\u0630\u0627 \u064a \u0640 \u0649 \u062d\u0642\u0648\u0642 \u0640 \u0627\u0638 \u0639\u0644 \u0640 \u0639 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0641 \u0640 \u0645\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0642\u0633\u0631\u064b \u0640 \u0644\u0648\u0644 \u0644\u0644\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u062f \u062d \u0640 \u0629 \u0648\u0625\u064a\u062c \u0640 \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0648\u0644\u064a \u0640 \u062a\u0648\u0641\u064a\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a \u0642\u0627\u0646\u0648\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u0640 \u0639\u0648\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0622\u0644\u0645\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644 \u0640 \u0642\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0648\u0627\u0631\u062f \u064a\u062d\u062f \u0628\u0634\u062f\u0629 \u0645\u0646 \u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0639\u0645\u0644\u064a \u0640 \u0627 \u0623\u0646 \u0646 \u0640 \u0629. \u0643\u0645 \u0640 \u0627\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062d\u0644\u064a \u0640 \u0644\u0642\u062a\u0635\u064a  \u0640 \u0627\u062c \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0641 \u0640 \u0629 \u0648\u0625\u062f\u0645 \u0640 \u0642\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u062a\u0646 \u0640 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0643\u0631\u064a\u0645\u062d \u0623\u0646 \u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0640 \u0629. \u0648\u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0631\u062c \u0640 \u0647\u062c\u0631\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0642\u0627\u0646\u0648\u0646\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u0631\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644 \u0640 \u0629 \u0623\u0648 \u062e\u064a \u0640 \u0639\u0648\u0646 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a \u0640 \u0629 \u0623\u0644\u0648\u0644\u0626\u0643 \u0627\u0644\u0630\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644 \u064a\u062a\u0645\u062a \u0640 \u0629 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0646\u0633\u0628 \u0640 \u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0635\u0644\u064a \u0640 \u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0628 \u0640 \u0629 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 \u0625\u0646 \u0640 \u064a \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u0637\u0631. \u0648\u0628\u0627\u0644\u062a\u0627\u0644 \u0640 \u0629 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062e \u0640 \u0627\u0645 \u0628\u0631\u062d\u0627\u0644\u062a \u0645\u062d\u0641\u0648\u0641 \u0640 \u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0642\u064a \u0640 \u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 \u0649 \u062f\u0641 \u0640 \u0629 \u0647\u0630\u0647 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 \u0629 \u062a\u062d\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a \u0640 \u064a \u0645\u0639\u0627\u0644\u062c \u0640 \u0641\u0634\u0644 \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u0644 \u0644\u0633\u062a\u062c\u0627\u0640\u0640\u0628\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u062f\u0627\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u062a\u064a \u062a\u062a\u0640\u0640\u062c\u0627\u0648\u0632 \u0640\u0640\u062a\u0642\u062f\u064a\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0627\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u0636\u0631\u0648\u0631\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0644\u0640\u0640\u062d\u0641\u0638 \u0643\u0631\u0627\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u062a\u062d\u0633\u064a\u0646 \u062d\u064a\u0627\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0647\u0645\n\n#### \u062a\u0648\u0627\u062c\u0640\u0640\u0647 \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u062a\u062d\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0642\u062a\u0635\u0627\u062f\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0633\u064a\u0627\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0636\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0641 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0634\u0645\u0648\u0644:\n##### \u0627\u0639\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0640 \u0649 \u0645\u0633 \u0640 \u0629 \u0639\u0644 \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639\u0641 \u0640 \u0639\u062a\u0645\u062f \u0647\u0630\u0647 \u0627\u0644\u0641\u0626 \u0640 \u0627\u0626\u062f\u064a\u0646. \u0648\u062a \u0640 \u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0639 \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u0644\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0644\u062d \u0640 \u0644\u062d\u062a\u064a\u0627\u062c\u0627\u0646\u0628  \u0640 \u0649 \u062c \u0640 \u0629 \u0645\u0633\u062a\u0645\u0631\u0629 \u0625\u0644 \u0640 \u0648\u0623\u0645\u0646\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0627\u0638 \u0640 \u064a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u0641 \u0640 \u0629 \u0641 \u0640 \u0639\u062a\u0628\u0631 \u0645\u062d\u0648\u0631\u064a \u0640 \u064a \u062a \u0640 \u0629\u060c \u0627\u0644\u062a \u0640 \u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u064a\u0629  \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u0644\u062d\u0645\u0627\u064a \u0640 \u062c \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0637\u0646\u064a \u0640 \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645 \u0640 \u0627 \u0641 \u0640 \u0647\u0627 \u0648\u0625\u062f\u0645\u0627\u062c\u0647 \u0640 \u0649 \u0646\u0641\u0633 \u0640 \u0627 \u0639\u0644 \u0640 \u0639\u0632\u064a\u0632 \u0627\u0639\u062a\u0645\u0627\u062f\u0647 \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u062a \u0640 \u0639\u0644\u0629 \u0640 \u0629 \u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a \u0640 \u0649 \u0643\u064a\u0641\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0633\u062a\u0624\u062b\u0631 \u0639\u0644 \u0640 \u0625\u0646 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636 \u0640 \u0639 \u0630\u0644\u0643\u060c \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u062a. \u0648\u0645 \u0640 \u0627\u0633\u0643 \u062f\u0627\u062e\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639 \u0640 \u064a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645 \u0640 \u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631  \u0640 \u0644\u0633\u062a\u0649  \u0640 \u0644\u0633\u062a\u0636\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0641 \u0644\u062f\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0636\u064a\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0629. \u0648\u0642\u062f \u064a\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0631\u0636 \u0644\u0623\u0644\u0646\u0638\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0637\u0646\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u0645\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0642\u062f \u064a\u0631\u0647\u0642\u0647\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u0648\u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u062a\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0642\u0645 \u0639\u0648\u0627\u0645\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u064a\u0634 \u0628\u064a\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0633\u0643\u0627\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0636\u064a\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0648\u062a\u0631 \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u062a\u0632\u0627\u064a\u062f \u0627\u0644\u062e\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0647\u0636 \u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646\u060c \u0645\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u064a\u0624\u062f\u064a \u0625\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0644\u0633\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631\u0644\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0627\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a\u0629 \u0648\u0639\u062f\u0645 \u062a\u0640\u0640\u0635\u0627\u0639\u062f \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0648\u062a\u0631\u0627\u062a\n\n#### \u062a\u0634\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0628\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0642 \u0639\u0645\u064a\u0642 \u0625\u0632\u0627\u0621 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0623\u062b\u064a\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0631\u062a\u0628 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u062a\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a\u0644 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0646\u0634\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u062a\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0644\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0637\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0642 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0646\u0633\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0646\u064a:\n##### \u0629 \u0640 \u0627\u0646\u060c \u0645\u0635\u062d\u0648\u0628 \u0640 \u064a \u0644\u0628\u0646 \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0626\u064a\u0646 \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u0639\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u0627\u062f\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u0639\u062f\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0634 \u0640 \u0627\u0646\u064a. \u062d\u064a\u062b \u062a\u0635 \u0640 \u064a \u0648\u0627\u0625\u0644\u0646\u0633 \u0640 \u0627\u0642 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062f\u0646 \u0640 \u0644\u0635 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0637 \u0640 \u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u062a\u0642 \u0640 \u0627 \u0641 \u0640 \u062c\u060c \u0628\u0645 \u0640 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0631\u0627\u0645 \u064a \u062a\u062d\u0631\u0636 \u0640 \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0636\u0644\u0644 \u0640 \u0647\u062f\u064a\u062f\u0627\u062a \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062a\u0631\u0647\u064a\u0628 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0648\u0627\u062a \u0644\u0637\u0631\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0633\u0648\u0631\u064a\u064a\u0646. \u0625\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u0644\u0648\u0645 \u0640 \u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062a \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0638\u0645 \u0640 \u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0647\u062c\u0645 \u0640 \u0627\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0643\u0631\u0627\u0647\u064a \u0640 \u0628\u062e\u0637 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u062e\u0648\u0641 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0643\u0631\u0627\u0647\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u062d\u062a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u062a\u062c\u062f\u062f \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0639\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u062f\u0627\u0626\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062d\u0644\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u062a\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0645\u062e\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0637\u0631 \u0643\u0628\u064a\u0631\u0629 \u0644\u0632\u0639\u0632\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0633\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0642\u0631\u0627\u0631 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0648\u0640\u0640\u0644\u064a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0640\u0640\u0633\u0639\n\n#### \u0648\u0627\u0623\u0644\u0641\u0631\u0627\u062f \u0639\u062f\u064a\u0645\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u062c\u0645\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0623\u0646\u062d\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0621 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644\u0645 90% \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064a\u0646 \u0642\u0633\u0631\u064b \u0642\u0631\u0627\u0628\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0627\u0631\u062a\u0641\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0639 \u0645\u062e\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0637\u0631 \u0627\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u0627\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629:\n##### \u0629 400,000 \u062a\u0633\u062a\u0636\u064a\u0641 \u0640 \u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642 \u0640 \u0629 \u0641 \u0640 \u0634\u062e\u0635 \u0639\u062f\u064a\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a \u0627\u0643 \u0623\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0645\u0646 \u0640 \u0649. \u0647\u0646 \u0640 \u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646 \u0630\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062f\u062e\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u062f\u0646 \u0640 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0628\u0642\u0631\u064b \u0640 \u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0643\u062b\u0631 \u0641 \u0640 \u0647\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0628 \u0640 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u060c \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0648\u062c\u0648\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062c\u062a\u0645\u0639\u0640\u0640\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u062a\u0640\u0640\u0623\u062b\u0631\u0629 \u0623\u0648 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639\u0631\u0636\u0640\u0640\u0629 \u0644\u062e\u0637\u0631 \u0627\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u0627\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629. \u0648\u0641\u0640\u0640\u064a \u0628\u0640\u0640\u0639\u0636 \u0627\u0644\u0628\u0627\u0644 \u062a\u0633\u062c\u064a\u0644 \u0640 \u0627. \u0625\u0646 \u0625\u0647\u0645 \u0640 \u0627 \u0628\u0645\u0641\u0631\u062f\u0647 \u0640 \u0639 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0648\u0644 \u062a\u062d\u0642\u064a\u0642\u0647 \u0640 \u0627\u0646\u064a\u0629 \u0627\u0644 \u062a\u0633\u062a\u0637\u064a \u0640 \u0629 \u0648\u0625\u0646\u0633 \u0640 \u0642\u062f\u0645 \u0641\u0648\u0627\u0626\u062f \u0633\u064a\u0627\u0633\u064a \u0640 \u064a \u062a \u0640 \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u062d\u064a\u062f\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062a \u0640 \u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646\u0638\u0645 \u0640 \u0639\u062f \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a \u0640 \u0644\u062f\u0627\u0646\u060c \u062a \u0640 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0629 \u0637\u0640\u0640\u0641\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0640\u0640\u0626 \u064a\u0645\u0643\u0646 \u0623\u0646 \u064a\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0628\u0634\u0643\u0644 \u0643\u0628\u064a\u0631 \u0645\u0646 \u062e\u0637\u0631 \u0627\u0646\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f\u0627\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0629\u060c \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0639 \u0645\u0640\u0640\u0627 \u064a\u062a\u0631\u062a\u0628 \u0639\u0644\u0640\u0640\u0649 \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0645\u0646 \u0639\u0648\u0627\u0642\u0628 \u0645\u062f\u0649 \u0627\u0644\u062d\u064a\u0640\u0640\u0627\u0629. \u064a\u0640\u0640\u0639\u062f \u0642\u062f\u0629 \u0640 \u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0639 \u0640 \u0629 \u0644\u062a\u062c\u0646\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u062d\u062f\u064a \u0640 \u063a \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0647\u0645\u064a \u0640 \u0627\u0633\u0628 \u0623\u0645\u064b\u0631\u064b\u0627 \u0628\u0627\u0644 \u0640 \u064a \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0642\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0646 \u0640 \u0627\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0632\u0648\u0627\u062c \u0641 \u0640 \u0627\u0629\u060c \u0645\u062b\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u0648\u0627\u0644\u062f\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0648\u0641 \u0640 \u064a \u0627\u0644\u062d\u064a \u0640 \u0629 \u0641 \u0640 \u062a\u0633\u062c\u064a\u0644 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u062d\u062f\u0627\u062b \u0627\u0644\u0647\u0627\u0645 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u062a\u0642\u062f\u0645 \u0646\u062d\u0648 \u0627\u0644\u0640\u0640\u062d\u0644\u0648\u0644 \u0627\u0644\u062f\u0627\u0626\u0640\u0640\u0645\u0629\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "\u0627\u0644\u0628\u062d\u063140",
-          "confidence": 0.6804221868515015,
-          "start": 167,
-          "end": 168
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2024",
-          "confidence": 0.7195489406585693,
-          "start": 172,
-          "end": 173
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2024",
-          "confidence": 0.6325499415397644,
-          "start": 172,
-          "end": 173
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/945ad768-f289-4247-bf32-f494470c1c15/%5BAR%5D%20Impact%20of%20funding%20cuts%20on%20MENA%20operations.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u0623\u062b\u0631 \u062a\u062e\u0641\u064a\u0636\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0645\u0648\u064a\u0644 \u0639\u0644\u0649 \u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629\n\u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0623\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627\n\n### **\u0627\u0644\u062d\u062a\u064a\u0627\u062c\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0644\u064a\u0629**\n##### **\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0648\u0646 \u0646\u0627\u0632\u062d\u064b\u0627\u064b \u0642\u0633\u0631\u064b\u0627\u064b \u0648\u0639\u062f\u064a\u064516 \u0644\u062a\u0642\u062f\u064a\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0633\u0627\u0639\u062f\u0629 \u0644\u062d\u0648\u0627\u0644\u064a \u0645\u0644\u064a\u0627\u0631 \u062f\u0648\u0627\u0644\u06312.342 \u060c \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629 \u0644\u062c\u0645\u0639 \u0645\u0628\u0644\u063a2024 \u0641\u064a \u0639\u0627\u0645\u0646\u0627\u0634\u062f\u062a** **\u0645\u0643\u062a\u0628 \u0639\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0627\u062a \u0641\u064a \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0625\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627.19 \u062c\u0646\u0633\u064a\u0629 \u0641\u064a**\n\n### **\u0627\u0644\u062c\u0647\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0646\u062d\u0629**\n\n\u0639\u0631\u0628 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629 \u0639\u0646 \u0627\u0645\u062a\u0646\u0646\u0627\u0646\u0647\u0627 \u0644\u0644\u062f\u0639\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0642\u0651\u062f\u0651\u0645 \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0647\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0646\u062d\u0629 \u0648\u0627\u0644\u062a\u064a \u0633\u0627\u0647\u0645\u062a \u0644\u0645\u0643\u0627\u062a\u0628 \u0639\u0645\u0644\u064a\u0627\u062a\u0647\u0627 \u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0625\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627 \u064f\u062a\n\n\u0628\u0623\u0645\u0648\u0627\u0644 \u063a\u064a\u0631 \u0645\u062e\u0635\u0635\u0629 \u0648\u0645\u062e\u0635\u0635\u0629\u060c \u0628\u0645\u0627 \u0641\u064a \u0630\u0644\u0643 \u0627\u0644\u062c\u0647\u0627\u062a \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0627\u0646\u062d\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u062e\u0627\u0635\u0629.\n\n\n[MENAreporting@unhcr.org :\u0644\u0644\u0645\u0632\u064a\u062f \u0645\u0646 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0641\u0627\u0635\u064a\u0644\u060c \u064a\u0645\u0643\u0646\u0643\u0645 \u0627\u0644\u062a\u0648\u0627\u0635\u0644 \u0645\u0639 \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0643\u062a\u0628 \u0627\u0625\u0644\u0642\u0644\u064a\u0645\u064a \u0644\u0644\u0645\u0641\u0648\u0636\u064a\u0629 \u0641\u064a \u0645\u0646\u0637\u0642\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0634\u0631\u0642 \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0648\u0633\u0637 \u0648\u0634\u0645\u0627\u0644 \u0625\u0641\u0631\u064a\u0642\u064a\u0627 \u0641\u064a \u0639\u0645\u0627\u0646\u060c \u0627\u0623\u0644\u0631\u062f\u0646 \u0645\u0646 \u062e\u0627\u0644\u0644](mailto:MENAreporting%40unhcr.org?subject=)\n\n\n[www.unhcr.org](https://www.unhcr.org/) 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/945ad768-f289-4247-bf32-f494470c1c15/%5BAR%5D%20Impact%20of%20funding%20cuts%20on%20MENA%20operations.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_118/raw/doc_118_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,82 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **UNHCR\u2019s recommendations to the** **Republic of Bulgaria for its** **Presidency of the Council of the** **European Union (EU)**\n## A time for solidarity\n### January - June 2018 [1]\n\n**Republic of Bulgaria / A family in the reception and registration centre, Voenna Rampa district, Sofia**\n\n**\u00a9 UNHCR / Nikolay Stoykov**\n\n\nThe Republic of Bulgaria will hold the Presidency of the Council of the\nEuropean Union (EU) at a critical time.\n\n\nMore than one year after the adoption of the September 2016 New York\nDeclaration for Refugees and Migrants, [2] EU Member States (MS) and\ninstitutions are in the process of concretizing the Declaration\u2019s principles. They\nare also following up on the commitments to a comprehensive approach to\nasylum and migration issues made as part of the Comprehensive Refugee\nResponse Framework (CRRF). Discussions are on-going as to how solidarity\nand responsibility-sharing can best be organized at the global level, and how\nto effectively extend protection to those in need while supporting refugeehosting countries.\n\n\nAspects of these discussions are of particular relevance for internal EU policies,\nparticularly at a time when EU institutions and MS are reflecting on possible\nlessons to be drawn from the 2015-2016 refugee situation, as well as reforming\nthe Common European Asylum System (CEAS).\n\n\n1 The present recommendations should be read together with UNHCR\u2019s _Better Protecting Refugees in the EU and Globally_ December 2016\nproposals, available at: [http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html, as well as with UNHCR\u2019s more detailed commentaries on the](http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html)\nEuropean Commission\u2019s proposals to reform the Common European Asylum System.\n2 UN General Assembly, _New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants : resolution / adopted by the General Assembl_ y, 3 October 2016,\n[A/RES/71/1, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/57ceb74a4.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/57ceb74a4.html)\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "These priorities are part of the following set of UNHCR\u2019s recommendations to\nthe Bulgarian Presidency. The recommendations cover four complementary\nareas, in line with the comprehensive approach to asylum and migration issues\npromoted by UNHCR in its Better Protecting Refugees proposals [3] to EU\ninstitutions and MS.\n\n#### **1. An EU that is engaged beyond its borders**\n\n\n**a. Paving the way for the adoption of the Global Compact on Refugees**\n\n\nThe Bulgarian Presidency will have a key role in following up on the\ncommitments set out in the September 2016 New York Declaration in order to\nadvance consultations leading up to the adoption of the Global Compact on\nRefugees, expected during the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly in\nSeptember 2018.\n\n\n\n\n\n**b. Developing and strengthening safe and legal pathways for persons in need**\n\n**of international protection**\n\n\nWith an estimated 1.2 million persons in need of resettlement globally in 2018,\nEU MS need to continue expanding and strengthening safe and legal pathways\nfor persons in need of international protection that are responsive to global\n\n\n3 UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), _Better Protecting Refugees in the EU and Globally: UNHCR\u2019s proposals to rebuild trust_\n_through better management, partnership and solidarity_ [, December 2016, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/58385d4e4.html)\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "protection needs. [4] Work on the Union Resettlement Framework [5] is ongoing,\nand the Bulgarian Presidency will have an important role in advancing these\ndiscussions. In parallel, the European Commission (EC) is likely to present the\nresults of its \u201cFitness check\u201d on legal migration during Bulgaria\u2019s Presidency.\nThese results will provide an opportunity for EU MS to further reflect on ways\nto develop and strengthen safe and legal pathways.\n\n\n\n\n\n**c. Enhancing protection in the Western Balkans as part of the pre-accession**\n\n**process**\n\n\nImportant progress has been made in the Western Balkans to reinforce asylum\nsystems. However, action is needed to further strengthen access to solutions\nfor refugees in the Western Balkans; for example, by focusing on fair and\nefficient asylum procedures and integration opportunities. In addition, further\nefforts are needed to prevent and address statelessness.\n\n\nOn 17 May 2018, the EU-Western Balkans Summit will be organized in Sofia,\nBulgaria, under the auspices of the Bulgarian Presidency. The Summit could\nprovide an opportunity to discuss strengthening protection-sensitive systems in\nthe region.\n\nFurthermore, the EC is likely to release the next Enlargement package during\nBulgaria\u2019s Presidency. The package will notably assess where candidates and\npotential candidates in the Western Balkans stand in implementing key reforms\nas part of the pre-accession process, including those in the fields of judiciary\nand fundamental rights (Chapter 23) and justice, security and freedom\n(Chapter 24). These two chapters, _inter alia_, are of particular relevance for\naccess to territory, identification, protection and assistance systems pertaining\nto asylum-seekers, refugees and stateless persons.\n\n\n\n\n\n4 To note, UNHCR called on EU MS to resettle 40,000 persons in 2018 in response to global resettlement needs. Separately, in September\n2017, UNHCR called on all resettlement States (European and non-European) to make 40,000 additional resettlement places available for\nrefugees located in 15 priority countries along the Central Mediterranean route.\n5 European Commission, _Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union Resettlement_\n_Framework and amending Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council_, COM(2016) 468 final, 13 July 2016,\navailable at: [https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160713/resettlement_system_en.pdf)\n[implementation-package/docs/20160713/resettlement_system_en.pdf.](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160713/resettlement_system_en.pdf)\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**d. Following up on the Grand Bargain commitments to reduce individual donor**\n\n**assessments**\n\n\nOne of the commitments made by donors as part of the Grand Bargain at the\nWorld Humanitarian Summit, and on which UNHCR is co-leading follow-up\nwork, was to reduce individual donor assessments of UN Agencies\u2019 operational\nand Headquarters activities. Individual donor assessments have proliferated in\nrecent years, and a large share thereof were conducted by EU MS. Council\ndiscussions would provide opportunities to explore how EU MS could reduce\nthese assessments.\n\n#### **2. An EU that is prepared**\n\n\nThe 2015-2016 refugee situation has exposed the need for better\npreparedness. In that context, the EC proposal to render the elaboration of\ncontingency plans mandatory is welcome. [6] These will need to be\ncomprehensive, and cover, among other aspects, reception capacity.\nContingency plans need to be complemented by efficient emergency\nmanagement mechanisms, including at EU-level. This includes streamlining\ncooperation platforms, and ensuring that EU Agencies are equipped to\neffectively perform their tasks.\n\n\n\n\n\n6 See European Commission, _Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception_\n_of applicants for international protection (recast)_, COM (2016) 465 final, Article 28, Brussels, 13 July 2016, available at: [http://eur-](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016PC0465)\n[lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016PC0465.](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016PC0465)\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **3. An EU that protects**\n\n**a. Upholding protection standards within the EU**\n\n\nDespite the existence of the CEAS, standards and practices continue to vary\nwidely throughout the EU. UNHCR has consistently noted that the standards\nand practices of some EU MS are at variance with international law. It is crucial\nthat EU MS implement the current asylum _acquis_ to ensure quality reception\nconditions and fair and efficient procedures. This includes providing asylumseekers with an effective opportunity to swiftly lodge their asylum claims,\nensuring adequate reception conditions, as well as guaranteeing that asylum\nprocedures, including timeframes, are in line with applicable EU law. It also\nmeans that detention should only be resorted to as an exceptional and last\nresort measure, when determined to be necessary, reasonable, and\nproportionate to a legitimate purpose, with alternatives to detention effectively\navailable and accessible, and with prompt judicial review mechanisms in place.\nChildren should not be detained for immigration-related reasons. Comparable\nconditions throughout the EU would notably contribute to supporting the full\nand effective implementation of the Dublin Regulation, [7] as well as to reduce\nirregular onward movement and the risks of sexual and gender-based violence.\nIn this context, facilitating prompt and effective family reunion within the EU\nunder the Dublin Regulation, including through the use of its \u201cdiscretionary\nclauses\u201d, should remain a priority. [8]\n\n\n\n\n\n**b. Ensuring a well-managed access to the EU\u2019s protection space**\n\n\nImportant discussions are being held as to how solidarity and responsibilitysharing can best be organized at the global level as follow-up to the adoption\nof the September 2016 New York Declaration and in the lead-up to the adoption\nof the Global Compact on Refugees envisaged for 2018. UNHCR has been\ndeeply grateful for the important contribution of EU MS and institutions in these\ndiscussions and indeed in support of the practical application of the CRRF.\nHowever, UNHCR notes with concern that aspects of the EC proposals to\nreform the CEAS and further discussions at EU-level appear to be focusing on\n\n\n7 European Commission, _Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms_\n_for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States_\n_by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast), COM(2016) 270 final,_ Brussels, 04 May 2016, available at:\n[https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-270-EN-F1-1.PDF.](https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-270-EN-F1-1.PDF)\n8 For evidence-based information on current practice on family reunion under the Dublin Regulation, and recommendations to MS for the\nefficient implementation of the Dublin Regulation as well as for its reform, see UNHCR\u2019s recently published study _Left in Limbo: UNHCR Study_\n_on the Implementation of the Dublin III Regulation_ [, August 2017, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/59d5dcb64.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/59d5dcb64.html)\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "procedures entailing the possibility of shifting protection responsibilities outside\nof the EU. This includes the possible introduction of mandatory admissibility\nprocedures, which would take precedence over family reunion possibilities, and\nmaking greater use of safe country concepts. Depending on how they are\nactually developed and presented, such an approach may risk being at odds\nwith the commitments to global responsibility-sharing made by EU MS and\ninstitutions under the September 2016 New York Declaration.\n\nInstead, UNHCR suggests that EU MS continue to focus on improving asylum\nprocedures within the EU. Those procedures need to be complemented notably\nby a functioning return system, in order to maintain the integrity of the EU\u2019s\nasylum space. Such return systems would obviously need to respect important\nsafeguards, including respect for the principle of _non-refoulement_ as well as\nthe due consideration of humanitarian and statelessness-related aspects.\n\n\n\n\n\n**c. Fostering intra-EU solidarity**\n\n\nSituations in which a small number of EU MS bear disproportionate\nresponsibility are unsustainable. They often have significant negative\nimplications on the availability and quality of protection responses. This goes\nhand-in-hand with substantial human and material costs, as well as important\npublic policy challenges. Greater intra-EU solidarity needs to be fostered.\nDespite the formal end of the emergency relocation mechanism, the EC has\nindicated its readiness to support voluntary relocation from Greece and Italy. In\naddition, the reform of the Dublin system provides an opportunity to embed an\nintra-EU solidarity component into the CEAS.\n\n\n9 European Commission, _Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for_\n_international procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing Directive 2013/32,_ COM(2016) 467 final, Brussels, 13 July\n2016, available at: [https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-467-EN-F1-1.PDF.](https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-467-EN-F1-1.PDF)\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**d. Protecting refugee children**\n\n\nThe 2015-2016 refugee situation exposed gaps in the migration and asylum\nsystems of many EU MS when it came to the protection of children. Further\nefforts are needed to develop an approach driven by the best interests of the\nchild in order to ensure that children are properly identified, registered,\nprotected, and that durable solutions are offered to them. This is particularly\nimportant for unaccompanied and separated children, who are exposed to\nserious protection risks during their journeys, including exposure to smuggling\nand trafficking networks.\n\n\nIn that context, it is key to continue to build on the momentum provided by the\nrelease of the April 2017 EC Communication on the Protection of Children [10] to\naddress those gaps, while reforming the CEAS in a way that is mindful of the\nprotection needs of children, including when unaccompanied or separated.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n10 European Commission, _Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2017)211 final,_ Brussels,\n12 April 2017, available at: [https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/20170412_communication_on_the_protection_of_children_in_migration_en.pdf)\n[migration/20170412_communication_on_the_protection_of_children_in_migration_en.pdf.](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/20170412_communication_on_the_protection_of_children_in_migration_en.pdf)\n11 Council of the European Union and European Parliament, _Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16_\n_December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals_, 16 December\n2008, available at: [http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:348:0098:0107:en:PDF.](http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:348:0098:0107:en:PDF)\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**e. Strengthening the identification, registration and protection of stateless**\n\n**persons**\n\n\nThe December 2015 Council Conclusions on Statelessness [12] encouraged\naction and exchanges of information and good practices, including in the area\nof identification of stateless persons. The CEAS reform provides an opportunity\nto ensure that EU asylum rules provide for the adequate identification,\nregistration and protection of stateless persons in the EU. In addition, building\non the momentum created by the introduction of a statelessness determination\nprocedure in its own country, UNHCR would be grateful to the Bulgarian\nPresidency for showing leadership in ensuring that the issue of statelessness\nremains on the EU\u2019s agenda. This would be an important achievement to\nshowcase at the High Level Event on statelessness to mark the halfway point\nof the #IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness, which UNHCR will organize\nin October 2019. In that context, EU MS will be encouraged to share\nachievements, good practices and pledges.\n\n\n\n\n#### **4. An EU that integrates**\n\nA safe and secure status is key for refugees\u2019 effective integration in their new\ncommunities. UNHCR welcomes the position of the Council, as it does that of\nthe European Parliament, in opposing the introduction of mandatory and\nsystematic status review as part of the Qualification Regulation. [13] However,\nother aspects of the CEAS proposals could have a negative impact on the\nability of refugees to effectively integrate. These include provisions that could\nlead to differing integration outcomes for persons with refugee status and\nbeneficiaries of subsidiary protection, as well as the introduction of restrictive\nfamily definitions, with family unity being a key aspect for refugee integration.\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR, December 2017\n\n\n12 Council of the European Union, _Council_ _Conclusions_ _on_ _Statelessness_, 4 December 2015, available at:\n[http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/04-council-adopts-conclusions-on-statelessness/.](http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/04-council-adopts-conclusions-on-statelessness/)\n13 European Commission, _Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on standards for the qualification of third-_\n_country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for_\n_subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection granted and amending Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003_\n_concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents_, COM(2016) 466 final, 13 July 2016, available at:\n[https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160713/proposal_on_beneficiaries_of_international_protection_-_subsidiary_protection_eligibility_-_protection_granted_en.pdf)\n[package/docs/20160713/proposal_on_beneficiaries_of_international_protection_-_subsidiary_protection_eligibility_-](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160713/proposal_on_beneficiaries_of_international_protection_-_subsidiary_protection_eligibility_-_protection_granted_en.pdf)\n[_protection_granted_en.pdf.](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160713/proposal_on_beneficiaries_of_international_protection_-_subsidiary_protection_eligibility_-_protection_granted_en.pdf)\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/89fd779d-5f4c-340f-9390-a23bf5f85815/5a33c40f4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_119/raw/doc_119_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,73 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "Today [over 65 million people are forcibly displaced, including 22.5 million refugees, many of whom have been](http://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html)\ndriven from their homes by a historic rise in conflict and violence. The global responsibility to respond to this mass\nmovement has largely been shouldered by a small number of countries hosting refugees and other forcibly displaced\nas well as donors providing support to them.\n\n\nThe EU is a central partner to address forced displacement globally and assist the forcibly displaced and their hosts\nabroad and at home. With progressive policy frameworks in place [1], the EU seeks to find political solutions to the root\ncauses of forced displacement, to ensure the operationalization of the humanitarian and development nexus and to\npursue a development-led approach to forced displacement. Moreover, the EU has put mechanisms into place which\naddress forced displacement through a whole of institution approach.\n\n\nThese encouraging trends speak to the principles of the [New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants.](http://www.unhcr.org/new-york-declaration-for-refugees-and-migrants.html)\nThe United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) considers the EU as an important actor in the\nimplementation of the New York Declaration\u2019s Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) and of the\nfuture global compact on refugees (GCR). The GCR is a historic opportunity to apply a new global approach to\nrefugee situations. It seeks to bring humanitarian and development aid, economic and legal measures, as well as the\nresources of refugees and hosting communities themselves together so refugees and their hosts can be better in\ncontrol of their lives. They can thrive rather than survive and forcibly displaced can stay closer to their home rather\nthan risking their lives in dangerous secondary movements.\n\n\nA key condition for the successful adoption and application of the GCR is the successful mobilization **of predictable**\n**and additional funding** to match renewed efforts of large refugee hosting countries. As a humanitarian donor, the EU\ncontinues to provide reliable financial support to assist people forced to flee and the communities that host them. As\nthe biggest development donor globally, the Union has also taken action and mobilized additional funding under the\nMultiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2014-2020 to ensure that neither forcibly displaced nor host communities\nare left behind as we progress towards the [2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.](https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld)\n\n\nWhile UNHCR appreciates this increased commitment, it appeals to the EU to use the next MFF 2021-2027 to\nsystematically consolidate and scale up its engagement in forced displacement. Its financial engagement should be\nneeds- and rights-based, and as predictable as possible. This would send a strong signal of the EU\u2019s firm pledge to\ndeliver on the paradigm of global responsibilty-sharing enshrined in the New York Declaration and the future GCR.\n\n\nFurther, the EU\u2019s engagement does not stop at its external borders. Maintaining the integrity and efficiency of\nasylum systems within the EU is also key and represents a major and costly endevaour. As a democratic union,\nfounded on the respect for human rights and the dignity of the person, the EU should, in compliance with its own\nCharter on Fundamental Rights and in particular its founding Treaty, sustain its engagement to ensure that persons\n\n\n1 Selection of EU policies: https://goo.gl/jxadeo; https://goo.gl/pu1zdv; https://goo.gl/7uTTcc; https://goo.gl/Y99nTw.\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS ON EU MULTIANNUAL FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK 2021-2027 1/4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a34b4759-cad8-388e-8c23-90630d832c07/5ad7602c4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "in need of international protection can access and benefit from asylum in Europe. In this context, addressing asylum\nand protection needs (including integration) inside the EU should remain a financial priority of the EU Member\nStates and of the EU itself for its next budetary period from 2021 to 2027.\n\n\nIn light of the above and in addition to the United Nations\u2019 position paper on the European Union\u2019s next MFF,\nUNHCR addresses the following recommendations to the EU for its next MFF :\n\n## ADDRESSING FORCED DISPLACEMENT GLOBALLY\n\n\nRecommendation 1: Mainstream forced displacement across external instruments\n\n\nIn line with the 2030 Agenda, the World Humanitarian Summit and the New York Declaration for Refugees and\nMigrants, the EU\u2019s approach to forced displacement recognizes that only humanitarian, development and political\naction together can address the displacement challenges effectively and holistically. It would therefore be important\nthat forced displacement challenges are mainstreamed across and within all external instruments, from prevention\nand peace-building to the emergency and long-term response and from thematic support to geographic programmes.\nInstruments should be able to respond to the full range of displacement situations (cross-border or internal\ndisplacement; conflict/violence or natural disaster-induced displacement), in a cohesive and coherent manner. This\nwould support partner countries in ensuring that the forcibly displaced and their host communities are not left\nbehind in their progress towards the SDGs. It would also contribute to SDG 10 _\u201cReduce inequality within and among_\n_countries\u201d_ [2] and better respond to displacement easing pressures leading to secondary movements.\n\n\nRecommendation 2: Develop sustainable asylum systems\n\n\nIt is key that EU increases its financial support aimed specifically at developping and strenghening fair and efficient\nasylum systems in non EU-countries, including in EU neighbouring and candidate countries. Such support would\nbe an expression of global solidarity. It would ensure that asylum-seekers are able to access asylum and effective\nprotection in the places where they first seek protection, thus addressing a major driver of dangerous onward\nmovement.\n\n\nRecommendation 3: Ensure support for the eradication of statelessness\n\n\nIn line with SDG 16.9 _\u201cProvide legal identity for all\u201d,_ and considering the nexus between statelessness and forced\ndisplacement, the EU should explicitly provide support to the prevention and reduction of statelessness in third\ncountries. This should include, amongst others, the strengthening of civil registration mechanisms, and the\nestablishment of procedures to provide nationality documentation to individuals with entitlement to it.\n\n\nRecommendation 4: Ensure timely, adequate and needs-driven\nfunding for emergency responses and protracted situations\n\n\nThe next MFF should ensure adequate financing for emergency responses and protracted situations, including\nflexible, un-earmarked, and multi-year funding wherever possible, in line with commitments made as part of the\nGrand Bargain. The next MFF should maintain a **separate instrument** for **EU humanitarian aid** to ensure the\nneutrality and independence of humanitarian action from security and geo-political interests. This would match\n\n\n2 See Target 10.7 _\u201cfacilitate orderly, safe, and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through implementation of planned and well-_\n_managed migration policies.\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS ON EU MULTIANNUAL FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK 2021-2027 2/4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a34b4759-cad8-388e-8c23-90630d832c07/5ad7602c4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "the operational necessity of reaching people in need of life-saving assistance quickly. Welcoming the growing\nmobilisation of development assistance for forced displacement, UNHCR encourages the EU to develop policies\nand guidelines to maximize the European added value of the respective instruments while ensuring that **increased**\n**development assistance** does _not_ lead to a **reduction in humanitarian funding** as long as humanitarian needs persist.\n\n\nThe allocation for the humanitarian aid budget line should **increase to a minimum 2 billion EUR per year** as opposed\nto the current 1 billion EUR annually. When the last MFF was designed in 2012, 62 million people were in need of\nhumanitarian assistance as opposed to 164 million in 2017. [3] EU spending for humanitarian aid in previous years has\nsystematically reached more than 1.5 billion EUR while starting from a lower budget line. A lot of welcome efforts\nhave been undertaken in order to mobilise more funds to answer growing humanitarian needs, using the Emergency\nAid Reserve but also drawing from other EU instruments. However, striving for more efficiency, an increased\nallocation from the start would allow for better planning and more efficient administration of the EU\u2019s financial\nsupport during the year. [4] Some form of standby support to countries facing large crises, for essential functions such\nas reception and registration, should be considered.\n\n\nRecommendation 5: Ensure systematic, predictable and additional development funding\n\n\nUNHCR recommends to translate the [2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development promise to leave no one](https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld)\nbehind into impactful financial instruments and budget lines. The EU should **ensure that the specific protection**\n**needs of refugees and the particular impact of forced displacement on host countries and communities are**\n**taken into due account** . Host communities that seek to strengthen policies and institutions for the resilience of\nlocal and forcibly displaced communities require significant, systematic and reliable contributions from donors\nlike the EU to accompany their efforts, until solutions can be found. The **particularities of forced displacement**\n**require well-funded instruments** that improve shock responsiveness, foster host community leadership to enable\nprotection, self-reliance and resilience, and promote evidence based interventions.\n\n\nThe EU\u2019s leadership should translate into systematic, predictable and flexible funding to help **manage the shock**\ncaused by an inflow of forcibly displaced persons. Moreover the next MFF should allow the EU \u2013 the biggest provider\nin development aid globally - to step up its engagement in support of the forcibly displaced, host countries and host\ncommunities, and systematically reflect the impact of forced displacement situations in the design of its external\nactions. This should involve dedicated development resources, **over and above regular development programmes**,\nprovided under favourable terms through both bilateral and multilateral channels, with direct benefits to host\ncountries and communities, as well as to the forcibly displaced. Such resources should provide for crisis response, as\nwell as for the longer-term by, for example, increasing country allocations through reserve funds. This would create\nmore favourable policy outcomes and improve the protection and material conditions of the forcibly displaced in\nhost countries. Further, the next MFF should also enable **systematic development action in favour of countries of**\n**origin** in addition to financing for peace building and state building. This would enable conditions for sustainable and\nvoluntary return, where appropriate.\n\n\nRecommendation 6: Track and showcase EU support\n\n\nIt is hard to evaluate how much EU aid is allocated to assist forcibly displaced and their hosts. A robust tracking\nsystem which monitors EU spending would help to showcase the EU\u2019s continued and possibly increased support\nto address forced displacement. With precise data in place the EU would be able to showcase its engagement as a\nreliable global actor to address fored displacement. It could thus send a strong signal of global responsibiliy-sharing\nto large refugee hosting countries, the key principle enshrined in the future global compact on refugees.\n\n\n3 http://devinit.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/GHA-Report-2017-Executive-summary.pdf\n\n4 Voice \u201cPost 2020 Multiannual Financial Framework. What EU humanitarian aid needs and why\u201d: https://ngovoice.org/publications\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS ON EU MULTIANNUAL FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK 2021-2027 3/4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "tracking\nsystem",
-          "confidence": 0.9699848294258118,
-          "start": 673,
-          "end": 675
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "monitors EU spending",
-          "confidence": 0.5179860591888428,
-          "start": 676,
-          "end": 679
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.5710378885269165,
-          "start": 714,
-          "end": 715
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a34b4759-cad8-388e-8c23-90630d832c07/5ad7602c4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## ADDRESSING ASYLUM AND PROTECTION NEEDS INSIDE THE EUROPEAN UNION\n\nRecommendation 7: Invest in protection systems within the EU\n\n\nAs highlighted in the the 2018 [ECRE-UNHCR report \u2018\u2019Follow the money\u2019\u2019 on the use of the EU Asylum, Migration and](http://www.unhcr.org.cy/el/nea/article/b4eb54532e79fea1852bfe60f9332a3b/follow-the-money-a-critical-analysis-of-the-use-of-the-eu-asylum-1.html)\nIntegration Fund (AMIF), EU funding should seek to complement, not to substitute, national envelopes. This would\nensure giving a European added value to EU financing, one of the core principle that should guide EU spending in the\nnext MFF. EU funding should thus aim at investing in protection systems within the EU in a comprehensive manner,\nincluding investment in protection-sensitive border management, establishing reception capacity and common\nregistration and identification systems, developing fair and efficient asylum procedures, establishing systems for\nunaccompanied and separated children, as well as ensuring better preparedness. As per the abovementioned\nreport, UNHCR recommends that at least 20 per cent of the future AMIF be allocated and spent on asylum-related\nactivities. To support the succesful integration of refugees and stateless persons in their host communities in the\nlonger-term, UNHCR recommends that a minimum of 30 per cent of the future AMIF and other relevant structural\ninstruments be allocated and spent on integration measures.\n\n\nRecommendation 8: Foster greater solidarity and responsibility-sharing\n\n\nUNHCR very much welcomes the important contributions that EU institutions and Member States have made\nto increase resettlement to the EU. Yet, in light of the global resettlement needs and the current decrease in\nresettlement spaces available globally, more support is needed. EU funding will therefore be key to support\nadditional resettlement efforts as well as the development of complementary pathways of admission to the EU,\nincluding family reunification. More support to the latter would in particular address some of the drivers of onward\nmovement. Solidarity and responsibility-sharing also need to be supported within the EU. In that context, UNHCR\nfavourably considers the possibility of granting additional funding per person transferred under the corrective\nallocation mechanism of the future Dublin system.\n\n\nRecommendation 9: Support the identification and protection of stateless migrants\n\n\nThere are over 400,000 stateless persons in the EU, including a sizable number of stateless migrants. Future funding\nfor EU Member States needs to explicitly provide support to the identification and protection of stateless persons.\nThis includes, amongst others, support to the establishment of procedures for the determination of statelessness\nand the inclusion of stateless persons as a beneficiary group in all EU funded integration and social cohesion\nprogrammes and projects.\n\n\nRecommendation 10: Foster partnerships and support civil society actors\n\n\nThe partnership principle which is meant to foster consultations among all stakeholders is an important tool for\nensuring a balanced and fair implementation of AMIF funds. It is thus recommended that the partnership principle\nbe made mandatory at national and EU levels. In that context, taking into account the key role played by the civil\nsociety in upholding protection standards and principles, it is recommended that part of the MFF be earmarked for\ncivil society actors. This would be in line with the whole-of-society approach promoted in the GCR.\n\n\nUNHCR, April 2018\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS ON EU MULTIANNUAL FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK 2021-2027 4/4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a34b4759-cad8-388e-8c23-90630d832c07/5ad7602c4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_12/raw/doc_12_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,224 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **ADVOCACY NOTE** A CRUCIAL NEED TO REINFORCE ACTIONS AGAINST THE GROWING THREAT OF EXPLOSIVE DEVICES (ED) IN NIGER\n\n\u2018\u2018Access to populations in need in Niger is more than necessary for all actors to relieve the suffering of\nthese populations. However, the use of explosive devices is increasing day by day, making access to\npopulations difficult and continues to increase the number of dead and injured. Particular attention\nshould be paid to incidents related to explosive devices.\u2019\u2019\n\n\n_July 2023_\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**I.** **Background**\nNiger is marked by a humanitarian situation characterized by attacks by non-state armed groups\n(NSAG) in Liptako Gourma and in the Lake Chad basin, which have caused forced displacement of\naround 700,000 people [1] including 400,000 internally displaced people (IDP) [2], 251,760 refugees and\n50,377 returnees. Despite efforts made by the State and its partners, the security situation remains\nworrying in certain localities in the regions of Tillabery, Tahoua, Diffa and Maradi. In 2022,\napproximately 3,821 protection incidents were recorded in these 4 regions and affected 18,408\npeople. During the first half of 2023, the protection situation did not improve despite a lull observed\nin some regions. More than 1,800 protection incidents were recorded from January to June 2023 (on\naverage 955 incidents per quarter in 2022 against 934 during 2023). It is deploring to see the continued\nabuses by the NSAGs including theft and extortion of property, physical assaults, kidnappings, murders,\nsexual violence but also incidents related to explosive devices (ED). The security situation and military\noperations in neighboring countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Nigeria), the continuation of NSAG incursions\ninto Niger, the intensification of operations by the Defense and Security Forces (DFS) are all factors\nthat predict the persistence of ED threats in Niger.\n\nIndeed, since 2022, the threat of ED has continued to rage in the regions of Tillabery and Diffa. The\nProtection Cluster recorded approximately 55 ED-related incidents in 2022 (a 34% increase compared\nto 2021). From January to June 2023, 32 ED incidents were reported, representing more than half of\nthe total number of incidents reported in 2022. It is also worth highlighting the problem of food\ninsecurity which affects several departments, including those affected by ED threats. In fact, faced with\nthe effects of food insecurity, communities could resort to negative coping strategies, in particular that\nof venturing into areas affected by ED in search of means of subsistence or even collecting scrap metal\nfound on explosive remnants of war for resale.\nIn the face of a growing threat from ED, mine action capacities remain limited in Niger. Considerable\nchallenges exist both in programmatic actions and in the coordination of interventions. No mine action\ncoordination mechanism is functional either at the national level or in the regions affected by ED. This\nmakes it difficult to strategically harmonize, target and prioritize mine action interventions. The\nobjective of this note is to strengthen advocacy with state authorities, the various technical and donor\npartners in order to support mine action in Niger, protect communities and humanitarian actors\nagainst the risks associated with ED and enable them to enjoy their fundamental rights and freedoms.\n\n\n## **II. Analysis of the evolution of ED incidents and their impact**\n\nFrom the last quarter of 2022 to the 2nd\n\nreported mainly in the regions of Tillabery\n\n**2023, which indicates a worrying increase**\n**in the threat of ED in Niger.** This threat\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 UNHCR Niger montlhy PoC statistics, Juin 2023\n2 Population displacement statistics, Ministry of Humanitarian Action and Disaster Management, july 2023\n3 Source : National Commission for the Collection and Control of Illicit Weapons (CNCCAI in french)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "affects civilians more than the military, especially\nin the 2nd quarter of 2023 **(Ref graph3).** In fact,\nthe reported ED incidents resulted in a total of\n132 victims [4] and survivors, most of whom (52%)\nwere civilians (killed or injured). **The percentage**\n**of civilians killed is almost double that of military**\n**killed,** which puts the threat on civilians more\nthan militaries and reflects the need to\nstrengthen mine action within affected\ncommunities.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe affected regions are those of Tillabery (areas of the 3 borders in the Sahel) and Diffa (region of the\nLake Chad basin). **The Tillabery region has 7 affected** departments [5] **, and the Diffa region has 4** . A\nminimal number of ED incidents have also been reported in 3 other regions: Agadez, Dosso and Niamey\n( **Ref graph2** ). This situation puts more than 200,000 people at risk of ED incidents in the affected areas.\n\n\nThe prevalence of ED incidents\nrelated also leads to\nrestrictions on the mobility of\ncivilian populations on the\nroads to weekly markets, and\nthe main cities of\ncommunities/departments.\nAbout 36% of those\ninterviewed [6] say they\nencounter mobility constraints\ndue to the activities of the\nNSAGs and military operations.\nThis indicator varies from one\nregion to another. In the\nregions of Diffa and Tillabery,\n56% of respondents say they\nencounter mobility\nconstraints, one of the main\nreasons being the presence of\nED. This considerably limits the periodic supply of households with means of subsistence and\nnecessities in addition to the fear and psychological distress that the unpredictable presence of ED\ninflicts on communities. It is also important to highlight that of the 11 affected departments in the\n\nDiffa and Tillab\u00e9ry regions, 9 (82%) are also affected by the food insecurity [7] . This could exacerbate\n\n\n4 CNCCAI: The disaggregation by sex and age of the 2023 data for victims is not yet available. However, according\nto the Child Protection Sub-cluster, the Child Protection Working Group of the Diffa region recorded 18 child\nvictims of ED in 2022, the majority of whom (74%) are girls who went to look for firewood.\n5 Departments of: Torodi, Say,T\u00e9ra, Tillab\u00e9ry, Gotheye, Bankilar\u00e9 et, Ouallam (r\u00e9gion de Tillab\u00e9ry) et Diffa,\nBosso, Main\u00e9 et N'Guingmi (region de Diffa)\n6 According to protection monitoring data (P21) 1st semester 2023.\n7 [Food security situation, june 2023](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVzLNdVSeHdrZ0iNx0YUf2LNiWuO5gBS/view?usp=sharing)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ED incidents",
-          "confidence": 0.8726436495780945,
-          "start": 28,
-          "end": 30
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Tillabery",
-          "confidence": 0.7032327055931091,
-          "start": 110,
-          "end": 111
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2023",
-          "confidence": 0.7063620090484619,
-          "start": 13,
-          "end": 14
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "civilians",
-          "confidence": 0.6191365718841553,
-          "start": 1,
-          "end": 2
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2023 data for victims",
-          "confidence": 0.7146441340446472,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 386
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "disaggregation by sex and age",
-          "confidence": 0.8502408266067505,
-          "start": 375,
-          "end": 380
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2023",
-          "confidence": 0.9895362854003906,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 383
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2022",
-          "confidence": 0.7770628333091736,
-          "start": 416,
-          "end": 417
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "protection monitoring data",
-          "confidence": 0.9276497960090637,
-          "start": 476,
-          "end": 479
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Diffa region",
-          "confidence": 0.6392384171485901,
-          "start": 407,
-          "end": 409
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2023",
-          "confidence": 0.8096809387207031,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 383
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2022",
-          "confidence": 0.9220906496047974,
-          "start": 416,
-          "end": 417
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "the needs of communities to intensify their coping strategies including livelihood-seeking activities that\nmay expose them to ED risks.\n\n\nThe application of the [sanctions in progress following the coup in Niger could increase the cost of living](https://ecowas.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/COMMUNIQUE-FINAL-CINQUANTE-ET-UNIEME-SOMMET-EXTRAORDINAIRE-DE-LA-CONFERENCE-DES-CHEFS-DETAT-ET-DE-GOUVERNEMENT-DE-LA-CEDEAO-SUR-LA-SITUATION-POLITIQUE-AU-NIGER.pdf)\nand increase the vital needs of already vulnerable populations. This new situation would expose them\nto the risk of enrolment in NSAG for a salary and therefore increase the capacity of NSAG in the\ninstallation of ED. In addition, the population could intensify their survival strategies by engaging in\nseveral types of activities to adapt to the high cost of living, including the search for subsistence in\nareas potentially affected by ED. Consequently, an upsurge in ED incidents is very likely.\n\n## **III. Major challenges in mine action interventions (MA)**\n\n\n\nGraph4. Mapping of MA activities, 30 juin 2023\n\n\n\nIn January 2023, the\nProtection Cluster\nlaunched a joint initiative\nof mapping protection\ninterventions including\nmine action. The analysis\nof the data resulting from\nthis mapping combined\nwith the analysis of the\nprotection response\nmonitoring data brought\nout the observation\nbelow:\n\n\n\n\n                                  - Only two protection\nactors have interventions\nin MA which cover only a\nfew localities of the 7 out\nof 11 departments affected by ED **(Ref Graph4 & Gaph2).** 4 out of 11 departments most\naffected by EE remain without any LAM intervention.\n\n  - There is a **major gap in Explosive Device Risk Education** (EDRE) interventions in several regions\naffected by ED (Diffa, Tillabery, Dosso, Agadez and Niamey).\n\n  - A critical lack of victim assistance is observed in all 11 affected departments ( **Ref Graph5)** .\n\n  - Existing capacities have only made it possible to reach about 3,000 people [8] with EDRE\n[activities, representing only 2% of target set in the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP).](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n  - 98% of the HRP LAM target is therefore not reached. In addition, 77% of the funding\nrequirement MA interventions is not met.\n\n  - There is also a **lack of human resources dedicated to coordination at national and regional**\n**level, prevention, and assistance to victims** . The MA Sub-Cluster has not been functional since\nthe withdrawal of UNMAS in early November 2022, despite joint coordination efforts between\nCNCCAI and MA actors including Mines Advisory Group (MAG) and Humanity and Inclusion (HI)\n\n\n8 Dashboard des r\u00e9alisations de protection, cluster Protection, Avril 2023\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "protection response\nmonitoring data",
-          "confidence": 0.9943178296089172,
-          "start": 191,
-          "end": 195
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "mapping protection\ninterventions including\nmine action",
-          "confidence": 0.6086829304695129,
-          "start": 169,
-          "end": 175
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "MA",
-          "confidence": 0.5096026659011841,
-          "start": 151,
-          "end": 152
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2023",
-          "confidence": 0.6564216613769531,
-          "start": 156,
-          "end": 157
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2023",
-          "confidence": 0.5682000517845154,
-          "start": 159,
-          "end": 160
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "protection\nactors",
-          "confidence": 0.6036807298660278,
-          "start": 204,
-          "end": 206
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "  - **A** **considerable** **need** **for**\n**capacity building in MA** for\nthe various actors including\nfrontline humanitarian actors,\nMA committees is urgently\nneeded.\n\n## **IV. Key recommandations**\n\n\nWith the growing threat of ED, low geographic coverage, and low diversity of MA interventions, more\nthan 200,000 people living in ED affected areas remain unassisted and at increased risk of becoming\nvictims of ED. It is crucial to invest more in mine action to ensure communities receive gender and ageappropriate ED risk education. It would also enable communities to adopt safe behavior and access\ninclusive care services for victims and survivors of ED. Therefore, it is essential to strengthen the\nfollowing aspects:\n\n\n1. Advocacy: Strengthen advocacy with the various decision-makers (state authorities, technical\n\nand donor partners) for the return of UNMAS to Niger\n\n\n2. Coordination: Identify additional technical partners who can support MA coordination at\n\nnational and regional level (particularly in Tillabery and Diffa regions)\n\n\n3. Resource mobilization: In 2023 approximately 77% of MA funding requirement is not met. It is\n\nessential to mobilize an amount of USD [9] 2,000,000 to scale up MA coordination, data collection\nby the CNCCAI, ED risks education (EDRE), assistance to victims, demining and MA capacity\nbuilding.\n\n\n4. Collaboration: Strengthen collaboration with the various actors to have a map of the areas\n\naffected by ED in order to intensify training sessions, awareness-raising with both communities\nand frontline humanitarian actors\n\n\n9 [plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP 2023-2025, Niger](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Annexe 1 :** Some examples of ED incidents _(Sources : Protection Monitoring, CNCCAI, INSO)_\n\n\n      - _**20/03/23:**_ _around 8 a.m. the vehicle of a local authority jumped on an improvised_\n_explosive device at Bougoum, Torodi-Niamey axis (Tillabery region)_\n\n\n      - _**25/05/23 :**_ _ED in Ngouba at the passage of shepherds. 3 dead and cows killed (Diffa region)_\n\n\n      - _**16/06/23**_ _: EE against a DFS vehicle in Chetima Wango. 7 dead / 4 injured (Diffa region)_\n\n\n      - _**6/06/23 :**_ _an explosive remnant of war (ERW) exploded against 03 children in the village of_\n_Agali (department/municipality of Dosso). The victims who were looking for scrap metal_\n_probably confused the device with a piece of iron that they hit with a hammer. The explosion_\n_caused the death of a child and 02 injured. It should be noted that the CNCCAI Regional Branch,_\n_which is supposed to coordinate EDRE activities at the regional level, does not exist in Dosso_\n_due to a lack of resources._\n\n\n      - _**4/07/2023 :**_ _around 9 a.m., an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) allegedly exploded at the_\n_passage of vehicle of the DFS Niyya operation, who were patrolling on the Torodi-Makalondi_\n_axis, not far from the village of Niaktir\u00e9 (Tillab\u00e9ry region)._\n\n\n**Annex 2:** Testimonials from a Victim of EE Incidents\n\n\n**Story of a 45-year-old man, victim of explosive devices, Toumour commune/Diffa region**\n\n\n_I remember that Sunday, 7_ _[th ]_ _May 2023, Toumour market day. We had agreed with the late Mr. XX to go and get some_\n_food. Early in the morning we took the road. Mr. XX was in front with a cow in his possession that he intended to sell._\n_He was in front of me since the beast kept running. Between us there was about 20 meters. Approximately 2 kilometers_\n_from the community of Toumour we heard a loud unbearable detonation. I fainted waking up only a few hours later at_\n_the Toumour health center. I didn't even know how I had been transported there. I was half deaf. It was then that I was_\n_told that Mr. XX died as well as the cow. I learned that he was the one who stepped on the explosive device. It was truly_\n_terrifying. There was blood running all over my body from the explosion. I was scared, but the nurses made me_\n_understand that it was not that serious._\n\n\n_I was taken care of at the Toumour health center. But later I heard that my family paid money for my treatment. I_\n_overcame my trauma on my own. However, I recognize that, the health workers treated me well and tried to cheer me_\n_up. From the beginning until today, I have made efforts to forget this disaster. But it's not easy. I can't stop thinking_\n_about the late Mr. XX. In addition, today, I am half deaf because I only have one functional ear. I need a consultation to_\n_regain full hearing._\n\n\n_My neighbors come regularly to try to encourage me and help me to hold on. And today thank God, everything is back_\n_to normal except for the slight hearing impairment that bothers me. We have not received awareness raising about ED._\n_Perhaps, this is due to the fact that we lived a little away from Toumour. Currently I am afraid because in such situations_\n_neither my family nor our herd is safe. Everyone is exposed. Especially us nomads who are constantly on the move._\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "This advocacy note was developed with the contribution of several actors including:\n\n\n**PROCAP Niger**,\n\n\n**Regional Protection**\n\n**Cluster (WCARO)**\n\n### **FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT**\n\n\n**Aliou MAIGA,** Protection Cluster Coordinator in Niger\n\n\n**Email :** [maiga@unhcr.org](mailto:maiga@unhcr.org)\n\n\n**Zabeirou Alfazazi**, Protection Cluster Co Coordinator in Niger\n\n\nEmail : alfazazizabeirou@gmail.com\n\n\n**Daniel Thiombiano**, Protection Cluster Co facilitator in Niger\n\n\n**Email** :daniel.thiombiano@drc.ngo\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1613bd92-5065-4c7e-9263-f115ffea540f/1.%20Advocacy%20note%20MineAction%20-%20Niger_Eng.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_120/raw/doc_120_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,319 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "## United Nations A/AC.96/1178\n\nDistr.: General\n## **General Assembly**\n4 July 2018\nEnglish\nOriginal: English and French\n\n\n**Executive Committee of the**\n**High Commissioner\u2019s Programme**\n**Sixty-ninth session**\nGeneva, 1 to 5 October 2018\nItem 4 (a) of the provisional agenda\n**Consideration of reports on the work of the Standing Committee**\n**International Protection**\n\n### **Note on international protection**\n\n\n**Report of the High Commissioner**\n\n\n_Summary_\n\n\nThis note reviews developments in international protection from June 2017 through June\n2018. It reflects a pivotal period for persons of concern to UNHCR, and for host countries\nand communities, as the international community has worked towards adoption of a global\ncompact on refugees.\n\n\nThe note is broadly organized around the comprehensive refugee response framework and\nkey elements of the proposed global compact on refugees, recalling the centrality of\nprotection and reflecting relevant developments from a protection and solutions\nperspective.\n\n\nFurthermore, it examines the state of internal displacement worldwide, in the twentieth\nanniversary year of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, as well as the\nsituation of stateless persons.\n\n\nUnless otherwise specified, documents cited in this note are available from\nwww.refworld.org.\n\n\nGE.18-11062(E)\n# \uf02a\uf031\uf038\uf031\uf031\uf030\uf036\uf032\uf02a\uf020\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n#### Contents\n\n\n_Chapter_ _Paragraphs_ _Page_\n\n\nI. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-4 3\n\n\nII. Centrality of protection ........................................................................................... 5-16 3\n\n\nIII. Burden- and responsibility-sharing ......................................................................... 17-20 6\n\n\nIV. Reception and admission ......................................................................................... 21-34 7\n\n\nA. Admission ....................................................................................................... 21-22 7\n\n\nB. Reception and addressing specific needs ........................................................ 23-29 8\n\n\nC. Identification of those in need of international protection .............................. 30-34 10\n\n\nV. Meeting needs and supporting communities ........................................................... 35-42 11\n\n\nA. Education ........................................................................................................ 36-37 11\n\n\nB. Employment and livelihoods .......................................................................... 38-40 11\n\n\nC. Documentation and legal identity ................................................................... 41-42 12\n\n\nVI. Solutions ................................................................................................................ 43-59 13\n\n\nA. Voluntary repatriation ..................................................................................... 44-48 13\n\n\nB. Resettlement ................................................................................................... 49-53 14\n\n\nC. Local integration ............................................................................................. 54-56 15\n\n\nD. Other pathways for admission ........................................................................ 57-59 16\n\n\nVII. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 60 16\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **I. Introduction**\n\n1. In 2017, the number of people forced to flee their countries due to persecution,\nhuman rights violations, armed conflict, violence and public disorder, falling within\nUNHCR\u2019s mandate, rose to 19.9 million \u2013 up from 17.9 million at the end of 2016. In\naddition, 5.4 million Palestinian refugees fell under the mandate of the United Nations\nRelief and Works Agency, while a further 40 million people were displaced within their\nown countries.\n\n2. An upsurge in violence in the Central African Republic, ongoing fighting in the\nSyrian Arab Republic and Yemen, and a combination of conflict and food insecurity in\nSomalia and South Sudan, continued to provoke displacement. Meanwhile, new internal\nand cross-border movements were fuelled by insecurity, including in Burundi, the\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Libya, Myanmar, and the northern and central\nparts of Mali. The deteriorating situation in Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) also\ntriggered the movement of Venezuelans across borders, bringing the number who arrived in\nneighbouring countries since 2014 to over 1.5 million. While the peace agreement in\nColombia was a critical step forward, several regions were affected by drug trafficking,\nillegal mining and the presence of armed groups. Violence and serious human rights abuses\nin northern Rakhine State in Myanmar compelled some 687,000 stateless Rohingya to flee\nthe country between August 2017 and April 2018 in one of the fastest-developing refugee\nsituations in two decades. In Afghanistan, violence and insecurity continued to trigger\ndisplacement, undermining the sustainability of returns.\n\n3. Against this background, the international refugee protection regime remains more\nrelevant than ever. In follow-up to the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants\n(New York Declaration), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September\n2016, 2017 saw stakeholders come together in a series of thematic discussions to advance\nideas for the global compact on refugees. Building on over 65 years of law and practice,\nthe early lessons learned from the application of the comprehensive refugee response\nframework (CRRF), and the outcomes of formal consultations with States in 2018, the\nglobal compact will seek to fill recurrent gaps in the international refugee response,\nincluding more equitable and predictable burden- and responsibility-sharing among States,\nthrough a multi-stakeholder approach. The year 2018 is, therefore, critical for refugees and\nfor host countries and communities. Moreover, it marks the twentieth anniversary of the\nGuiding Principles on Internal Displacement.\n\n4. This year\u2019s note on international protection focuses on the centrality of protection,\nwhich has underpinned the preparations for the global compact on refugees. Organized\nbroadly around the key areas of the proposed global compact, it reflects global\ndevelopments from June 2017 to June 2018.\n#### **II. Centrality of protection**\n\n\n5. Protection is central to any humanitarian response and, in practice, entails activities\naimed at obtaining full respect for the rights of individuals, in accordance with international\nhumanitarian, human rights and refugee law. In other words, the humanitarian response\nenhances access to these rights, whether at the outset of an emergency, in protracted\nsituations or in the search for solutions. Protection considerations permeate humanitarian\nactions on behalf of refugees and others in need of international protection, stateless\npersons and the internally displaced. This begins with, but is not limited to, strengthening\nthe legal frameworks through which their rights are secured.\n\n6. The legal framework for the protection of refugees includes, at its core, the\n1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention) and its 1967\nProtocol, as well as specific regional instruments. It draws from relevant international\nhuman rights instruments, international humanitarian law and other international legal\nstandards. Consistent with its mandate, UNHCR works with States to support accession to\nthe 1951 Convention and other relevant instruments, and to guide their interpretation and\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\napplication, including through engagement in national and regional legislative and judicial\nprocesses. The Office supported the development of the Arab Refugee Convention by the\nLeague of Arab States, as well as the reform of the Common European Asylum System.\nPromising legislative developments took place through the application of the CRRF,\nincluding in Djibouti and Ethiopia.\n\n7. UNHCR supported the development of national legislation in almost 80 countries.\nIn guiding the interpretation and application of legal protection standards, UNHCR issued\n\u201cGuidelines on international protection on the applicability of Article 1D of the\n1951 Convention to Palestinian refugees\u201d (Guidelines on International Protection No. 13).\nThe Office also issued numerous legal guidance documents and country-specific eligibility\nguidance. In November 2017, UNHCR signed a memorandum of understanding with the\nSouthern Common Market (MERCOSUR) to promote international refugee law and\nadherence to international protection instruments, as well as joint activities for the\nprotection of displaced and stateless persons. Following national consultations with\ngovernments and civil society in the context of the Brazil Plan of Action\u2019s triennial\nevaluation, three sub-regional thematic consultations were held, focussing on the quality of\nasylum, the eradication of statelessness, and comprehensive, complementary and\nsustainable solutions. As a contribution to the development of the global compact on\nrefugees, States in Latin America and the Caribbean issued the \u201c100 points of Brasilia\u201d [1],\ncontaining numerous good practices.\n\n8. UNHCR worked with States and partners on identifying stateless populations and on\ncombatting statelessness, consistent with relevant international instruments, as well as to\npromote actions to end statelessness through its #IBelong campaign. Efforts focused on\nsupporting accession to the statelessness conventions and the reform of nationality laws.\nThe latter included measures to promote equality between men and women on conferring\nnationality to children, for example in Madagascar and Sierra Leone, as well as to simplify\nadministrative procedures, including for civil registration. During the reporting period,\nChile acceded to the 1954 Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961\nConvention on the Reduction of Statelessness, and Burkina Faso and Luxembourg acceded\nto the latter. Cuba eliminated a residence requirement for the acquisition of Cuban\nnationality for children born abroad to a Cuban parent, and Colombia established a\nmechanism to apply safeguards that prevent children from being born stateless, consistent\nwith regional and international instruments. Brazil, Costa Rica and Ecuador issued\nregulations advancing efforts to identify and protect stateless persons, and reduce\nstatelessness, including on naturalization. During 2017, a significant number of persons\nwho were stateless or whose nationality was undetermined had their nationality conferred\nor confirmed, including in Indonesia, Iraq, the Philippines and Thailand, as well as in\nvarious countries in Central Asia.\n\n9. At the regional level, the Banjul Plan of Action on the Eradication of Statelessness\n2017-2024, adopted by the Economic Community of West African States and which came\ninto force in June 2017, sets out concrete actions and timeframes. Since coming into force,\nBurkina Faso and Mali have adopted national action plans to eradicate statelessness. In\nOctober 2017, the Member States of the International Conference of the Great Lakes\nRegion signed a Declaration on the Eradication of Statelessness, committing to reform\nnationality laws and policies. A ministerial meeting on belonging and legal identity was\nheld in Tunisia in February 2018, under patronage of the President. Convened by the\nLeague of Arab States, in partnership with UNHCR, the meeting resulted in the adoption of\na declaration calling for children to have the right to a legal identity, as well as for equal\nnationality rights for women and men. Countries hosting Syrian refugees, working closely\nwith UNHCR and partners, succeeded in reducing the percentage of Syrian children who\nwere undocumented from birth, from 35 to 2.5 per cent, over the past five years.\n\n\n1 Available from\n\nwww.acnur.org/fileadmin/scripts/doc.php?file=fileadmin/Documentos/BDL/2018/11590.\n\n\n**4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n10. Those who have been forced into displacement, but who have not sought or have not\nyet succeeded in reaching safety in another country, also face protection concerns. The\nGuiding Principles on Internal Displacement, established in 1998, continue to provide an\nimportant international framework for the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs).\nUNHCR\u2019s engagement in internal displacement dates back more than 45 years and has\nbeen recognized by successive General Assembly resolutions. At the global level, UNHCR\nleads or co-leads the protection, shelter, and camp coordination and camp management\nclusters. It also steers 25 of the 35 country-level protection clusters and other inter-agency\nprotection coordination mechanisms, including in the Central African Republic, Iraq,\nNigeria, South Sudan and the Syrian Arab Republic. In September 2017, UNHCR finalized\na review of its engagement in situations of internal displacement, with a view to working\nmore predictably across the spectrum of displacement.\n\n\n11. In Afghanistan, UNHCR strengthened protection for IDPs through in-kind\nassistance, cash-based interventions to cover medical expenses and the provision of legal\naid. In the Americas, UNHCR helped develop local capacities in Honduras to strengthen\nland and property rights and help facilitate solutions, and supported the authorities in El\nSalvador with profiling of IDPs to improve the evidence base and facilitate an effective\nresponse. In Africa, UNHCR worked with partners in the Kasai region of the Democratic\nRepublic of the Congo to collect data on IDPs and their vulnerabilities through area-based\nmonitoring, and in the Middle East, the Office supported information campaigns to advise\nIDPs about their right to vote and facilitated voting inside a number of camps and\nsettlements. Ukraine\u2019s efforts to address internal displacement were advanced by the\nadoption of an integration and solutions strategy, with support from UNHCR.\n\n\n12. In some regions, environmental degradation, natural hazards and the adverse effects\nof climate change, including drought, exacerbated and altered the character and complexity\nof displacement, as seen in the Lake Chad basin and the Horn of Africa. Drawing on its\nnormative expertise and operational experience, UNHCR worked with States and partners\nto protect and assist those affected by these phenomena. UNHCR also provided technical\nsupport to the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change on\nhuman mobility-related aspects of climate change, including through participation in the\nTask Force on Displacement of the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage.\nUNHCR, Georgetown University and the International Organization for Migration (IOM)\ndeveloped a toolbox [2] to support governments with planned relocation processes, for people\nwho are at risk or have been displaced, which are participatory and undertaken from a\nrights-based approach. In light of the increasing attention to displacement related to\nclimate change, disasters and natural hazards, UNHCR commissioned a report on\nchallenges and opportunities in this area. [3]\n\n\n13. The delivery of protection goes beyond promoting the adoption of legal standards\nand includes activities aimed at ensuring their respect in practice. Humanitarian action\nshould not, however, substitute community-based protection mechanisms, but rather\nsupport them, in line with the principles of partnership and accountability. Consultations\nwith persons of concern are essential to ensure their involvement in identifying and\naddressing needs and finding solutions. Such consultations were conducted in operations\nworldwide to inform planning and responses to displacement by States, UNHCR and\npartners.\n\n\n14. UNHCR updated its policy on age, gender and diversity (AGD) in March 2018, to\nensure that persons of concern can participate meaningfully in decisions affecting their\nlives. The policy reflects the fact that displacement and statelessness impact people in\n\n\n[2 Available from http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/596f1bb47/planned-relocation-](http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/596f1bb47/planned-relocation-toolbox.html)\n\ntoolbox.html.\n3 Available from www.unhcr.org/protection/environment/596f25467/unhcr-climate-change-disasters\ndisplacement.html.\n\n\n**5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\ndifferent ways, and that understanding and analysing personal considerations are necessary\nfor effective responses. The policy proposes concrete actions for implementation and\nmeasuring results in AGD-inclusive programming, including disaggregated data collection;\nparticipation and inclusion; communication and transparency; feedback and response; and\ngender equality in decision-making, community management and leadership. It also covers\naccess to documentation, assistance, economic opportunities, and comprehensive services\naimed at preventing and responding to sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV).\n\n\n15. Facilitating the participation of refugee youth remained key for UNHCR. The\nUNHCR Global Youth Advisory Council contributed recommendations for the global\ncompact on refugees, including through the thematic discussions in 2017. In the Middle\nEast and North Africa (MENA), UNHCR and the United Nations Children\u2019s Fund\n(UNICEF) convened national youth consultations involving government officials, civil\nsociety and displaced youth representatives, aimed at identifying opportunities to strengthen\nyouth programming. In Pakistan, the Refugee Affected and Hosting Areas initiative\nfocused on youth empowerment through education, skills training and livelihood support.\nUNHCR\u2019s Youth Initiative Fund supported over 40 youth-led protection projects, focusing\non youth engagement and social cohesion. Sports initiatives are also helping promote\nsocial inclusion and safe spaces for children and youth. This includes the launching of an\nOlympic Refugee Foundation by the International Olympic Committee and the\n#SignAndPass campaign by UNHCR and the Football Club Barcelona Foundation.\n\n\n16. Combatting discrimination and challenging negative gender stereotypes is also\ninextricably linked to protection. UNHCR has carried out initiatives aimed at bringing\nabout social cohesion and bridging cultural divides. This includes supporting refugee food\nfestivals in 13 cities in Europe and continuing its _No Stranger Place_ series, which profiles\nrefugees and their host families through powerful media stories. [4]\n\n#### **III. Burden- and responsibility-sharing**\n\n\n17. At the end of 2017, some 85 per cent of the world\u2019s refugees were hosted in\ndeveloping countries, which faced economic challenges and had the fewest resources to be\nable to respond. The principle of burden- and responsibility-sharing is grounded in\ninternational law and in the recognition that hosting large numbers of refugees often places\nstrains on the affected countries, and that a satisfactory response cannot be achieved\nwithout international cooperation. Broadening of the support base for refugee protection\nacross the whole of society, and among national, regional and international stakeholders,\nremains crucial.\n\n\n18. Welcome progress was seen in applying the CRRF **,** currently ongoing in 14\ncountries. Regional approaches in Africa and the Americas, led by the concerned countries\nwith international support, have demonstrated their effectiveness in addressing both new\nand protracted situations. Consistent with the commitments made in the Nairobi\nDeclaration and Plan of Action in March 2017, the Member States of the InterGovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) continued to pursue a comprehensive\nregional approach to durable solutions for Somali refugees, through more harmonized\nasylum policies, supporting access to public services, developing out of camp policies and\npromoting the right to work. The comprehensive regional protection and solutions\nframework (known by its Spanish acronym \u201cMIRPS\u201d), contained in the San Pedro Sula\nDeclaration of October 2017, provides a mechanism to strengthen protection and enhance\nsolutions through a multi-stakeholder approach and building on regional cooperation and\nburden- and responsibility-sharing mechanisms. In the Middle East, UNHCR and the\nUnited Nations Development Programme (UNDP) continued to lead the Regional Refugee\nand Resilience Plan (3RP) for the Syria crisis, coordinating over 240 partners that support\n\n\n4 See www.unhcr.org/en-us/no-stranger-place.html.\n\n\n**6**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nnational responses in the five main host countries. The 3RP, along with the Solutions\nStrategy for Afghan Refugees (SSAR), are good models for the application of\ncomprehensive refugee responses.\n\n19. Consistent with the multi-stakeholder approach underscored in the New York\nDeclaration, UNHCR continued to pursue reinforced cooperation with development actors.\nUNHCR\u2019s partnership with the World Bank Group was strengthened, including through an\nagreement to establish a joint data centre on forced displacement. The World Bank\u2019s\nIDA-18 refugee sub-window for lower income countries and the Global Concessional\nFinancing Facility for middle-income countries were instrumental in supporting more\ninclusive refugee policies and strengthening institutions. Welcome developments also\nincluded the publication of guidelines on addressing forced displacement through\ndevelopment planning and cooperation, by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation\nand Development's (OECD) Development Assistance Committee, as well as the issuance of\na joint UNDP-UNHCR communication setting out parameters for cooperation between the\norganizations. The UNHCR-supported MENA Civil Society Network on Displacement\nconvened consultations on operationalizing and strengthening the \u201cwhole of society\u201d\napproach to promoting protection, assistance and access to solutions.\n\n20. Efforts to engage other actors, such as cities and municipalities, as well as private\nsector partners, also intensified. Under the \u201cCities of Solidarity\u201d initiative in the Americas,\nunderpinned by the Brazil Plan of Action, States developed criteria for designating cities of\nsolidarity. The first meeting of the Refugee Coalition for Europe, which aims to bring\ntogether and give a voice to refugee representatives, was organized with support from the\nMunicipality of Milan and civil society. The private sector, including corporations,\nphilanthropists and foundations, contributed to the discussion, bringing important\nexperience to bear around technology, employment, skills training, renewable energy and\nother areas. Jordan\u2019s Azraq refugee camp became the first refugee camp powered by\nrenewable energy, funded by the IKEA Foundation\u2019s Brighter Lives for Refugees\ncampaign. In November 2017, UNHCR and the European Electric Association agreed to\nwork together to provide reliable, sustainable and clean energy to refugees. With support\nfrom UNHCR, employer and worker groups advocated for refugee, IDP and migrant rights\n[in the process leading to the adoption of Recommendation 205 on Employment and Decent](http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO:12100:P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:3330503:NO)\n[Work for Resilience and Peace by the International Labour Conference in June 2017.](http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO:12100:P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:3330503:NO)\nUNHCR signed a letter of intent with the International Chamber of Commerce, focusing on\ncollaboration on infrastructure, education and employment. Chambers of commerce\nworldwide can support the advancement of refugees in accessing the labour market and\nfostering private sector support.\n\n#### **IV. Reception and admission**\n\n\n**A.** **Admission**\n\n\n21. The principle of non-refoulement represents a cornerstone of the international\nrefugee protection regime, prohibiting the expulsion or return of a refugee in any manner\nwhatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his or her life or freedom would be\nthreatened. It requires, as a general rule, that States grant individuals seeking international\nprotection access to the territory and fair and efficient asylum procedures or group-based\nprotection mechanisms, notably in a large-scale influx situation. The principle of nonrefoulement is a logical complement to the right to seek and enjoy asylum recognized in\narticle 14 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the seventieth anniversary of\nwhich will take place in 2018, and is reinforced by non-refoulement obligations under\ninternational human rights law.\n\n22. The principle of non-refoulement and the right to seek and enjoy asylum continued\nto be respected by most States, including by maintaining open-border policies. In Latin\nAmerica, for example, Brazil, Colombia and Peru maintained open borders for those\narriving from Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), as did Bangladesh in receiving refugees\n\n\n**7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nfrom Myanmar and Uganda in welcoming those fleeing conflict in South Sudan. At the\nsame time, there were instances where those seeking asylum were unable to do so, either\nbecause they were prevented from leaving or denied admission because they faced physical\nand administrative barriers at borders. In some places, landmines and other explosive\ndevices, prohibited under international humanitarian law, obstructed movements across\nborders. UNHCR cooperated with partners, including the United Nations Mine Action\nService, to raise awareness about landmines. Some countries increasingly resorted to\nrestrictive border management measures, limiting the ability of people to seek safety.\nHundreds of thousands of people attempted to use dangerous land and water routes, with\nmany refugees and migrants going missing or losing their lives at sea. Offshore processing,\nas well as the forced transfer of asylum-seekers to third countries where international\nprotection was not guaranteed, remained a concern and undermined international\ncooperation and responsibility-sharing.\n\n\n**B.** **Reception and addressing specific needs**\n\n\n23. Some regions continued to face challenges associated with mixed movements, with\nmany refugees moving irregularly alongside migrants. As efforts continued at the\ninternational level to strengthen migration governance through the development of a global\ncompact on safe, orderly and regular migration, UNHCR actively supported the process, as\nforeseen in the New York Declaration. Building on its \u201c10-point plan of action for refugee\nprotection and mixed migration\u201d, UNHCR continues to enhance operational cooperation\nwith partners; strengthen information, analysis and knowledge; and promote good practices\nto help States and other stakeholders respond more effectively to mixed movements. This\nincludes supporting arrangements to identify, screen and refer new arrivals to appropriate\nservices according to their needs, regardless of status. In Europe, UNHCR developed a\nborder protection monitoring information management system to ensure systematic\ncollection and harmonization of information on protection concerns faced by asylumseekers at and near borders. The system will support evidence-based protection\ninterventions, cross-border coordination and advocacy initiatives.\n\n24. Mixed movements by sea remained an ongoing challenge. Along the western\nMediterranean route, arrivals in Europe more than doubled in 2017 to over 28,000. Limited\nnumbers continued to cross the eastern Mediterranean, while the central Mediterranean was\nthe dominant route, particularly for those departing from Libya. In this context, an\nimportant feature of UNHCR\u2019s Central Mediterranean Strategy is the evacuation transit\nmechanism. Established in late 2017 in Niger, with the support of the Government and the\nEuropean Commission and in cooperation with IOM, it enables the orderly processing of\nasylum-seekers and refugees evacuated from Libya. In addition to its strengthened\noperational engagement, UNHCR established the Central Mediterranean Core Group as a\nplatform to seek commitments from States in offering safe and legal pathways to\nadmission. UNHCR also developed a set of recommendations for States to prevent and\nrespond to trafficking in persons and related abuses along the routes to Libya and Europe.\nIn late 2017, UNHCR launched the second phase of an awareness-raising campaign about\nthe dangers of crossing the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden to Yemen, including heightened\nsusceptibility to human trafficking and other abuses, highlighting stories from survivors.\nThe situation in Yemen remains highly complex, with major humanitarian and security\nchallenges, and large-scale internal displacement alongside continuing refugee arrivals in\nmixed movements.\n\n25. Refugees and other persons on the move faced SGBV, including domestic violence,\nsexual assault and rape. Positive counteractive measures included strategies to prevent and\naddress SGBV; the hiring of refugee men and women to patrol camps and reception\ncentres, report incidents to police and assist with maintaining law and order; and the\ninstallation of improved fencing, lighting, and separate sanitation and sleeping facilities for\nmen and women. Safe spaces for women and children at risk were also established in many\nregions, along with other approaches to address the specific needs of women and girls, such\n\n\n**8**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "as the use of female health care professionals and interpreters. In the Americas, the\nRegional Safe Spaces Network grew from three to five countries, including Colombia and\nVenezuela (Bolivarian Republic of). In Italy, UNHCR contributed to the development of\nstandard operating procedures to assist torture victims and adopted an SGBV strategy. In\nGreece, UNHCR and the Ministry of Interior signed a memorandum of understanding to\nsupport refugee women and children at risk. A UNHCR report on promising practices in\ngender equality for Syrian refugees in the Middle East and North Africa highlighted\nsuccessful initiatives, including measures to address SGBV. UNHCR also published\nresearch on the prevalence of SGBV against boys and men in the Syria situation, noting\nthat child labour increased exposure to SGBV. The strategic use of resettlement yielded\nsolutions for urgent protection cases, often including SGBV survivors.\n\n26. UNHCR continued to focus on the specific needs of victims of trafficking and\nmeasures to counter this phenomenon. To reinforce cooperation in anti-trafficking,\nUNHCR, IOM and the Heartland Alliance co-lead a global protection cluster Task Team on\nAnti-Trafficking. UNHCR also participates in the Inter-Agency Coordination Group\nagainst Trafficking in Persons and contributed to its \u201cIssues brief no. 3 on trafficking in\npersons and refugee status\u201d, providing practical recommendations to States and\npractitioners on the links between trafficking and refugee protection. UNHCR supported\nStates in achieving consistent implementation of asylum and other procedures aimed at\nprotecting victims of trafficking. \u201cJoint guidelines for the identification of victims of\ntrafficking among asylum-seekers\u201d were developed in cooperation with the Italian National\nCommission for Asylum, leading to increased referrals to national procedures.\n\n27. In 2017, some 52 per cent of refugees globally were children. Argentina, Brazil and\nPanama established new national protocols to ensure children have access to asylum\nprocesses, taking into account their best interests and promoting family reunification and\nalternatives to detention. El Salvador and Honduras introduced inter-institutional best\ninterest procedures to enhance identification and response capacity for children at high risk\nin the north of Central America.\n\n28. To uphold the best interests of the child, UNHCR worked with partners to support\nspecific arrangements for children, including alternative care arrangements for those\nseparated from their families, guardianship arrangements, best interests determination\nprocedures, psychosocial support and, where available, the inclusion of refugee children in\nnational child protection systems. Several countries prioritized the special needs of\nunaccompanied children, including Brazil and Serbia. In Europe, UNHCR, UNICEF, and\nthe International Rescue Committee established a consultative process to support States in\nstrengthening protection responses for unaccompanied and separated children. UNHCR,\nthe International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNICEF developed a regional strategic\nframework to address child labour in the Syria context, with an emphasis on promoting\nchild protection; livelihoods and cash assistance for families; and access to quality\neducation. UNHCR supported efforts by States and partners to reunite family members and\nadvocated flexible approaches when considering who constitutes \u201cfamily\u201d. Germany,\nwhich allows family reunification for refugees to whom it grants protection, is assisted by\nIOM in Lebanon and Turkey in the facilitation of visa procedures.\n\n29. Best State practice involves alternatives to detention for persons in need of\ninternational protection. These include release into custody of local institutions and open\naccommodation in conjunction with welfare agencies and with reporting requirements. The\ndetention of children for immigration-related purposes is never considered in their best\ninterest, irrespective of their legal or migratory status or that of their parents, as it severely\naffects their well-being and development. In the context of UNHCR\u2019s global strategy to\nend detention, a number of countries continued to report positive practices, including fewer\nchildren detained in Lithuania, Malaysia and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and\nNorthern Ireland. In many cases, alternatives targeting children and their families were\napplied. Regrettably, however, asylum-seekers continue to be detained in many countries\nwithout consideration of alternatives. Challenges in reception conditions also persist,\nincluding overcrowding and the lack of capacity to identify and assist persons with specific\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR report",
-          "confidence": 0.6377642154693604,
-          "start": 83,
-          "end": 85
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "report",
-          "confidence": 0.8243879079818726,
-          "start": 84,
-          "end": 85
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9681665897369385,
-          "start": 40,
-          "end": 41
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Middle East and North Africa",
-          "confidence": 0.8963727951049805,
-          "start": 96,
-          "end": 101
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Syrian refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8868301510810852,
-          "start": 92,
-          "end": 94
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nneeds. The situation on Greece\u2019s Aegean islands, where thousands of refugees live in\ninadequate conditions and face protection risks, is particularly worrying.\n\n\n**C.** **Identification of those in need of international protection**\n\n\n30. Effective registration systems help States identify new arrivals, particularly in the\ncontext of large-scale movements, ensure the integrity of protection systems and prevent\nfraud and corruption. Registration facilitates access to assistance and the identification of\nspecific needs, and provides information crucial to solutions. Brazil introduced new\nregistration forms that better capture data on asylum-seekers and vulnerabilities in order to\nprioritize cases. In Greece, the authorities progressively increased their presence in\nregistration and identification centres, allowing UNHCR to reduce its operational\nengagement, while maintaining a monitoring role. By May 2018, 5.3 million individuals\nhad been biometrically registered by UNHCR across 50 operations.  A global distribution\ntool, using biometrics to verify identity at food distribution points, is used in several\ncountries, including most recently in Brazil and Uganda. UNHCR contributed to the\ndevelopment of recommendations on refugee statistics adopted by the United Nations\nStatistical Commission in March 2018, which promote disaggregated data on refugees,\nasylum-seekers and IDPs by age and sex.\n\n31. The 1951 Convention does not elaborate on procedures for the determination of\nrefugee status. Yet, it is generally recognized that fair and efficient procedures for\nindividual refugee status determination (RSD) are essential for the full and inclusive\napplication of the 1951 Convention and other regional conventions, outside the context of\nlarge-scale situations. Fair, efficient and adaptable RSD procedures require strong State\ninstitutions to safeguard their integrity and reach appropriate decisions consistent with\ninternational law. In large-scale situations, group-based prima facie recognition and, when\nappropriate, temporary protection mechanisms have also been used by States, with the\nsupport of UNHCR.\n\n32. When States commit to transitioning responsibility for RSD from UNHCR to\nnational institutions, sustained engagement is required. This may include the drafting of\nnational refugee legislation. Indonesia and Thailand have taken initial steps towards\nassuming responsibility for RSD, while other States, such as Cameroon, Morocco and\nTurkey, are further advanced. UNHCR continues to support State institutions responsible\nfor RSD, including through its quality assurance initiatives in Europe and Latin America.\nConsistent with the CRRF, UNHCR is seeking approaches that support State RSD systems\nmore holistically, including through capacity assessment and development. Where\nUNHCR undertakes RSD under its mandate in lieu of a functioning State system, its\nengagement is driven by the potential protection impact, taking into consideration its ability\nto help refugees gain access to their rights and find solutions. Mixed movements pose\nspecific challenges in determining international protection needs. The responsible use of\ndifferentiated case-processing modalities after screening, such as simplified and accelerated\nprocedures, and the merging of registration and RSD interviews for cases with a\npresumption of inclusion, helps maintain fairness while contributing to efficiency. UNHCR\nhas supported numerous States seeking to address their RSD backlogs, including through\nmeasures focused on quality and efficiency in decision-making.\n\n33. Statelessness determination is equally grounded in international law and assists\nStates in fulfilling their commitments under the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of\nStateless Persons. To be effective, such procedures need to take into account countryspecific factors, such as the estimated size and diversity of the stateless population and the\ncomplexity of the legal and evidentiary issues to be examined. UNHCR welcomed the\ndecisions by Brazil, Ecuador and Montenegro to establish statelessness determination\nprocedures.\n\n34. National security considerations and international refugee protection can and should\nbe complementary. Recognizing that host States can benefit from integrated approaches\nthat protect refugees while safeguarding national security, UNHCR and the International\n\n\n**10**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "registration systems",
-          "confidence": 0.6596699357032776,
-          "start": 60,
-          "end": 62
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8377082943916321,
-          "start": 142,
-          "end": 143
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Brazil",
-          "confidence": 0.7176136374473572,
-          "start": 107,
-          "end": 108
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5172373056411743,
-          "start": 157,
-          "end": 158
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "asylum-seekers",
-          "confidence": 0.8460923433303833,
-          "start": 117,
-          "end": 118
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "refugee statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.8093040585517883,
-          "start": 211,
-          "end": 213
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9441465735435486,
-          "start": 169,
-          "end": 170
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.5088821053504944,
-          "start": 175,
-          "end": 176
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.9137142896652222,
-          "start": 157,
-          "end": 158
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees,\nasylum-seekers and IDPs",
-          "confidence": 0.567757785320282,
-          "start": 229,
-          "end": 234
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "RSD",
-          "confidence": 0.8430312871932983,
-          "start": 461,
-          "end": 462
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.934083104133606,
-          "start": 459,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "1954",
-          "confidence": 0.556547999382019,
-          "start": 594,
-          "end": 595
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8698484301567078,
-          "start": 490,
-          "end": 491
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nCommittee of the Red Cross developed an aide-memoire which provides operational\nguidance on maintaining the civilian and humanitarian character of refugee and IDP sites\nand settlements.\n\n#### **V. Meeting needs and supporting communities**\n\n\n35. Pending the availability of solutions, enhancing self-reliance allows refugees to\ncontribute to, rather than depend on, their host country. It also prepares them to obtain\ndurable solutions, notably voluntary repatriation. UNHCR is promoting self-reliance in the\nspirit of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development pledge to \u201cleave no one behind\u201d,\nthe World Humanitarian Summit commitment to a \u201cnew way of working\u201d and the CRRF.\nThe move away from past practices of encampment and parallel services for refugees\nexemplifies increased recognition of the benefits of supporting access to national systems,\nincluding education and health, and labour markets. Such approaches reduce vulnerability\nand build human capital, while benefiting host communities through strengthened services\nand systems. Where humanitarian assistance is provided, it should be delivered in ways\nthat benefit host communities, including where possible through local service providers.\nMany countries, including Ethiopia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kenya, Pakistan, Uganda,\nZambia and others, remained steadfast in their generosity towards refugees and took steps\nto advance self-reliance, including through the provision of education, skills training and\nlivelihoods. While increasing self-reliance often requires policy changes, such efforts must\nbe pursued in ways that contribute to the infrastructure, services and economies of the host\ncommunities.\n\n\n**A.** **Education**\n\n\n36. In line with the 1951 Convention, the Sustainable Development Goals and the\nCRRF, UNHCR advocated the inclusion of refugee children and youth in national\neducational systems. With support from the Educate A Child programme, UNHCR worked\nto expand access to primary education, more than doubling its 2017 target. Connected\nlearning, combining digital platforms with traditional classroom teaching, provided higher\neducation for 3,500 refugees in Afghanistan, Chad, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda,\nSri Lanka, Sudan and Thailand. Furthermore, 6,700 scholarships were granted by the\nAlbert Einstein German Academic Refugee Initiative (DAFI) to support higher education\nfor refugee students in 50 countries. In December 2017, IGAD Member States adopted the\nDjibouti Declaration on Refugees, committing to the inclusion of refugees in national\neducation plans by 2020. In April 2018, the Nairobi Declaration brought additional\ncommitments from States to make education systems more inclusive of refugees.\n\n37. UNHCR continued to support expanded enrolment in formal education, with an\nincrease in global primary enrolment from 50 per cent in 2016 to 61 per cent in 2017. A\nprogramme targeting youth was launched in Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda and Uganda, aiming\nto increase skills training and educational opportunities, including post-secondary. In\ncountries where barriers to education exist, such as language of instruction, lack of identity\ndocuments, tuition fees and legal residence status, UNHCR welcomed efforts by States to\naddress them, including in Belize, Ethiopia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Panama and\nTurkey. In S\u00e3o Paolo, the Legislative Assembly approved a bill waiving fees for the\nvalidation of university degrees obtained by refugees. A regional cooperation agreement\nwas signed with the Organization of Ibero-American States for Education, Science and\nCulture to facilitate access to education for persons of concern in the Americas. In\nDecember 2017, UNHCR launched the Refugee Education Management System, which\nwill help it manage education data for improved programming and monitoring.\n\n\n**11**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**B.** **Employment and livelihoods**\n\n\n38. Providing access to economic opportunities and promoting inclusion contributes to\nthe economies of host communities and helps build self-reliance, enabling the displaced to\nmeet their needs and preparing them for solutions. ILO Recommendation 205 encourages\nStates to foster self-reliance for refugees by expanding access to livelihoods and labour\nmarkets in ways which support host communities. In the context of displacement, UNHCR\nand ILO cooperate closely to improve access to the labour market and strengthen\nimplementation of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work,\nincluding improved working conditions and social protection. The two organizations are\nalso working to promote inclusive economic development in host countries that improves\nlivelihoods for the displaced and host communities alike.\n\n39. Access for refugees to the labour market and social security benefits may be\nconstrained by the economic situation and development-related difficulties facing the host\ncountry. Taking into consideration such constraints, reliable information is required on the\nimpact of refugees on labour markets and the needs of existing labour forces and\nemployers. UNHCR continued to work with States to ensure access to vocational training,\nrecognition of qualifications, freedom of movement and the provision of documentation.\nCosta Rica, Ecuador and Mexico are cooperating with the private sector to create refugee\nemployment opportunities, and in April 2018, UNHCR and the OECD launched an\ninnovative multi-stakeholder action plan for engaging with employers in the hiring of\nrefugees.\n\n40. In addition to enhancing protection, financial services (including cash-based\nassistance) facilitate access by refugees to livelihood opportunities and labour markets. In\nMexico, the National Banking and Securities Commission will allow foreigners (including\nrefugees) to use documents issued by the National Migration Institute as identification for\naccess to financial services. In Zambia, the Central Bank agreed to accept refugee\nidentification cards as proof of identity for receiving cash grants. In 2017, UNHCR\ndelivered $502 million in cash assistance, one third of which was dedicated to meeting\nspecific needs in 42 operations, including for education, to facilitate return and to reduce\nnegative coping strategies such as transactional sex and child labour. Cash combined with\nin-kind assistance and services allowed UNHCR and partners to deliver context-specific\nresponses that reinforced protection outcomes, allowing the displaced to prioritize their\nneeds, while contributing to resilience through socioeconomic inclusion and access to\nnational services and social programmes. UNHCR strengthened partnerships, including\nwith the World Food Programme, to expand cash-based interventions, and with the United\nNations Capital Development Fund to create a technical assistance fund to provide financial\nservices to displaced populations. To advance financial inclusion, UNHCR strengthened its\npartnership with the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency in Jordan and\nUganda, and with Financial Sector Deepening Africa in Rwanda.\n\n\n**C.** **Documentation and legal identity**\n\n\n41. Civil registration is critical to the displaced and serves as a major protection tool,\nnotably for women and girls. It helps establish legal identity and prevent statelessness, and\nis key for accessing education, employment, housing and medical care. The Ethiopian\nGovernment has taken legislative steps to ensure access to birth registration and civil\ndocumentation for refugees. In Ecuador, the civil registry initiated a process to enrol\nrecognized refugees in its database and issue identity documents that are identical to those\nissued to nationals, and Pakistan launched a country-wide exercise to register\nundocumented Afghans. The African Union Executive Council adopted a decision calling\nfor member States to include refugees, IDPs and persons at risk of statelessness in civil\nregistration and vital statistics systems. At a meeting of the Latin American and Caribbean\nCouncil of Civil Registry, Identity and Vital Statistics, 17 directors of civil registries agreed\nthat regional cooperation is needed to grant a legal identity to all persons, including through\n\n\n**12**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nuniversal birth registration, and committed to work towards eliminating the causes of\nstatelessness. For refugees, recognition of identity is essential to attain a durable solution.\nProof of identity helps States obtain accurate information about the persons living on their\nterritory, which is relevant for security and economic and social planning. UNHCR works\nwith States, the World Bank Group and others to build national civil registration and\nnational identification capacities, and facilitate access by persons of concern, including\nmarginalized and vulnerable groups. Access to civil documentation, including birth\ncertificates, is also prioritized in the 3RP.\n\n42. Refugees and stateless persons are entitled to a travel document issued by their\ncountry of lawful stay, supporting freedom of movement and facilitating solutions. In\nOctober 2017, the Executive Committee adopted a conclusion on international protection\n(No. 114 (LXVIII)) on machine-readable travel documents for refugees and stateless\npersons, recognizing their importance and good practices in issuance worldwide. Several\ncountries transitioned to machine-readable documents during the reporting period,\naffirming the conclusion\u2019s value for States and for refugees and stateless persons.\n\n#### **VI. Solutions**\n\n\n43. Ending displacement requires a mix of solutions, adapted to the specific\ncircumstances of each situation and the needs of the population. This includes the three\ntraditional durable solutions of voluntary repatriation, resettlement and local integration, as\nwell as other pathways for admission to third countries which provide additional\nopportunities for protection and solutions. To strengthen UNHCR\u2019s engagement in\npursuing solutions for persons of concern, UNHCR has created a Division of Resilience\nand Solutions. Beyond supporting the application of the CRRF, the Division will provide\nguidance in key areas, including education, livelihoods, self-reliance and reintegration. It\nwill furthermore focus on collaboration with development partners and promote the\ninclusion of refugees in national services.\n\n\n**A.** **Voluntary repatriation**\n\n\n44. Voluntary repatriation is the preferred solution for many refugees. While enabling\nrepatriation is first and foremost the responsibility of countries of origin, sustained support\nby the international community is needed to promote the conditions conducive to safe and\ndurable return. As a starting point, it is important to recognize the right to return. Factors\nthat have traditionally affected obtainment of this right include safety and security; good\ngovernance and rule of law, including at the local level; access to services, especially health\ncare and education; restitution of land and property, and access to housing, civil\ndocumentation and livelihood opportunities. Facilitating return often necessitates\nmeasures, taken by a wide range of actors, including confidence- and capacity-building\nactivities, effective returnee monitoring and reintegration packages. However, such actions\ncannot replace State engagement and the political will necessary to end conflict and build\npeace.\n\n45. Bangladesh and Myanmar agreed bilaterally to an \u201cArrangement on the Return of\nDisplaced Persons from Rakhine State\u201d in November 2017 and to a corresponding\n\u201cPhysical Arrangement for the Repatriation of Displaced Myanmar Residents from\nBangladesh\u201d in January 2018. These arrangements outline important commitments by both\ngovernments to ensure the voluntary, safe and dignified return of refugees to their places of\norigin. UNHCR was not a party to these arrangements; however, in April 2018, UNHCR\nsigned a memorandum of understanding with the Bangladeshi Government on voluntary,\nsafe and dignified return. Nevertheless, UNHCR considers that the conditions in Myanmar\nare not yet conducive to such voluntary repatriation calls on Myanmar to take concrete\nmeasures to create such conditions, consistent with the recommendations of the Advisory\nCommission on Rakhine State, including by addressing the root causes of displacement and\nproviding pathways to citizenship. UNHCR is committed to supporting Myanmar in\n\n\n**13**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\ncreating conditions conducive for the voluntary, safe and dignified returns of refugees.\nSince March 2018, UNHCR and UNDP have been engaged in discussions with the\nGovernment of Myanmar on a tripartite memorandum of understanding on voluntary\nrepatriation and on supporting recovery and development for all communities in Rakhine\nState.\n\n46. In Iraq, ensuring protection, including through safe and sustainable returns, is\ncritical to recovery and stabilization efforts. UNHCR advocated access to civil\ndocumentation and to accurate information about conditions in places of origin. It also\nsupported family reunification activities. The application of the CRRF for the Somali\nrefugee situation focused on attaining durable solutions, particularly supporting the\nconditions conducive to voluntary, safe and dignified return. This included measures aimed\nat strengthening security, building the capacity of the authorities and supporting the\ncountry\u2019s national development plan, for the benefit of returnees. With support from the\nUnited Nations Peacebuilding Fund, a Kenya-Somalia cross-border project aims to improve\nthe reintegration of returnees in Somalia. Additionally, post-return monitoring was\nlaunched in October 2017 to profile returning Somali refugees.\n\n47. In Afghanistan, UNHCR strengthened its return monitoring system. Nevertheless,\nsustainable returns have been made more challenging due to ongoing violence, insecurity\nand limited absorption capacity in return areas due to the lack of livelihoods, land\nmanagement and adequate shelter. The fifth Quadripartite Steering Committee meeting,\ninvolving the Islamic Republics of Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan, together with UNHCR,\nreaffirmed the significance of the SSAR. The parties reiterated their commitment to\ncontinue working together to facilitate voluntary return for Afghan refugees in safety and\ndignity, and to undertake joint resource mobilization efforts. Afghanistan\u2019s Displacement\nand Returnees Executive Committee continued bringing together key actors to strategize on\nminimizing the humanitarian-development gap and \u2013 adopting a \u201cwhole of society\u201d\napproach \u2013 to address issues such as documentation, registration and land for returnees.\nUNHCR and the World Bank Group signed a data-sharing agreement to better support the\nreintegration of Afghan refugee returnees through strengthened data collection and analysis.\n\n48. Following the meeting of the Tripartite Commission for the Voluntary Repatriation\nof Burundian Refugees, involving the Governments of Burundi and the United Republic of\nTanzania, some 13,000 people were assisted by UNHCR to return home in 2017. UNHCR\nsupported the voluntary repatriation of refugees to C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, Mali, Sri Lanka and\nSudan, among others. Concerns arose around forced returns to Nigeria, despite efforts and\ncommitments made in the context of tripartite arrangements, including an agreement signed\nby the Governments of Nigeria and Cameroon, together with UNHCR. In Honduras, a\nproject to identify potentially contested land in future return areas was launched with\ntechnical assistance from Colombia.\n\n\n**B.** **Resettlement**\n\n\n49. Resettlement is recognized as a strategic tool for achieving protection and solutions,\nbut it is also a tangible burden- and responsibility-sharing mechanism. Against a backdrop\nof large-scale forced displacement and constraints on global protection and solutions,\nresettlement needs identified by UNHCR have increased steadily since 2014. Currently\nthere are an unprecedented 1.2 million refugees in need of resettlement.\n\n\n50. In contrast with 2016, when States made over 163,200 resettlement places available,\n2017 saw a 54 per cent reduction to only 75,190 places. This declining trend in global\nresettlement quotas is expected to continue into 2018. The reduction has impacted\nUNHCR\u2019s ability to respond to emerging resettlement priorities, including in countries\nalong the central Mediterranean route, as well as to maintain and expand resettlement for\nSyrian refugees and vulnerable individuals in the CRRF roll-out countries. As places\noffered by States for urgent and emergency cases continued to shrink in 2017, UNHCR\ncould only submit some 2,090 cases in these categories \u2013 a 40 per cent decrease from 2015.\n\n\n**14**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nUNHCR was nevertheless able to ensure that more than 10 per cent of cases referred for\nresettlement in 2017 involved women and girls at risk.\n\n\n51. The resettlement system continued to face pressure linked to increased emphasis on\nnational security and the desire of some States to use resettlement as a migration\nmanagement tool. This further constrained UNHCR\u2019s ability to ensure protection for the\nmost vulnerable refugees, including those with heightened protection risks and serious\nmedical conditions. UNHCR advocated the continuation of resettlement programmes\nwhich were protection-centred, flexible and diverse. This included calls for the proposed\nEuropean Union resettlement framework to ensure that opportunities for resettlement were\nfocused on those most in need and that it effectively supported responsibility-sharing.\nMore broadly, it is hoped that the adoption of the global compact on refugees will provide\nnew momentum to expand the base of support for resettlement in the coming years.\n\n\n52. Through the Emerging Resettlement Countries Joint Mechanism, UNHCR\nsupported six countries with capacity development and technical advice to develop or\nexpand their resettlement and humanitarian admission programmes. UNHCR also invested\nin the new Global Refugee Sponsorship Initiative, which promotes and supports\ncommunity-based sponsorship, and worked with some resettlement countries on protectionsensitive in-country processing programmes to resettle extremely vulnerable IDPs from\nnorthern Iraq. In El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, UNHCR facilitated the\nresettlement of individuals at heightened risk through the protection transfer arrangement.\n\n\n53. Leveraging the interest of an increasing number of States in resettlement, UNHCR\ncontinued to apply the Resettlement Core Group model to specific situations, including for\nSyrian refugees and in the context of the central Mediterranean situation. UNHCR also\npartnered with States in coordinating and ensuring predictable longer-term resettlement\nopportunities for particular groups of refugees. UNHCR launched a resettlement\ninnovation project to take stock of its processes and map good practices in the field. In\nNepal, the large-scale Bhutanese resettlement programme drew to a close, with over\n112,000 refugees resettled to third countries over the past decade.\n\n\n**C.** **Local integration**\n\n\n54. Countries that support the local integration of refugees deserve support. Numerous\ncountries, notably in the industrialized world and Latin America, have found it\nadvantageous and in their interest to embrace the local integration of refugees, including by\nproviding durable legal status and naturalization, as foreseen in Article 34 of the 1951\nConvention, where appropriate. In Guinea-Bissau, the Government decided to grant\ncitizenship to refugees living in a protracted situation. Zambia implemented its decision to\nprovide long-term residency to former Rwandan refugees. In Chile, an initiative launched\nin 2017 allows access to nationality for people registered under non-citizen status and\nchildren born to foreign parents. Despite these advances, the challenges in implementing\nlocal integration programmes, particularly in large-scale situations, are acknowledged.\n\n\n55. Cities and municipalities in the Americas continued to adopt policies that support\nintegration and inclusion, with help from the private sector. For example, the municipality\nof Quito launched a programme that certifies local businesses which meet inclusion\nstandards. Mexico City signed an agreement with UNHCR aimed at fostering the inclusion\nof asylum-seekers and refugees in social security programmes, while a similar initiatives\nwas undertaken in S\u00e3o Paolo. In Italy, UNHCR works with local authorities and civil\nsociety to encourage good relations between refugees and host communities. Italy\u2019s\nNational Integration Policy was drafted in consultation with refugees and envisages specific\nmeasures for asylum-seekers on reception, housing and employment. In the former\nYugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the strategy for integrating refugees is complemented by\nspecific procedures for unaccompanied children and those considered vulnerable. In\nPoland, the city of Gdansk developed an integration model which was rolled out to 11 other\n\n\n**15**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\ncities in 2017. In April 2018, the OECD published research from 72 cities on local\napproaches to integration, accompanied by a checklist for cities and regions to use in\npromoting integration.\n\n\n56. Successful local integration programmes require efforts from all parties, including\nrefugees in their willingness to adapt, host communities in welcoming them and public\ninstitutions in meeting their needs. In some countries, significant additional support from\nthe international community, taking into account the needs of receiving communities, is\nessential.\n\n\n**D.** **Other pathways for admission**\n\n\n57. Other pathways for the admission of persons needing international protection can\nfacilitate access to protection and solutions, and alleviate pressure on host countries,\nparticularly in large-scale and protracted situations. Such pathways also create\nopportunities for refugees to learn new skills, acquire an education and reunite with family\nmembers in third countries.\n\n\n58. Although refugees sometimes find complementary pathways themselves, such\nprocesses may require the facilitation of administrative measures, complemented with\nprotection safeguards. To this end, UNHCR helped support the establishment and\nexpansion of complementary pathways, including in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia,\nFrance, Japan and Peru, along with other States in the MERCOSUR region. A new\npartnership was established with the United World Colleges to expand secondary education\nfor refugee students in third countries, and Talent Beyond Boundaries was commissioned to\ncreate a database of refugee talent in Jordan and Lebanon to facilitate labour mobility to\nthird countries. UNHCR and OECD initiated a mapping of non-humanitarian entry visas\nused by refugees in OECD countries to help develop guidance on complementary\npathways. UNHCR also supported the adoption of the African Union Protocol on Free\nMovement of Persons, Right of Residence and Right of Establishment, which will facilitate\naccess to other pathways for admission.\n\n\n59. Despite progress, refugees continue facing barriers and challenges in accessing\ncomplementary pathways, including being unable to obtain exit permits, entry visas and\ntravel documents. Other challenges include a lack of adequate protection safeguards and\nstrict eligibility criteria. UNHCR continues to support States and other stakeholders in\novercoming these obstacles and providing guidance and technical advice on developing\ncomplementary pathways that are predictable, sustainable and protection-sensitive.\n\n#### **VII. Conclusion**\n\n\n60. The international community is now at a crossroads, with a number of promising\nadvances in the context of the development of the global compact on refugees. This\ncompact has the potential to mobilize the international community in support of a shared\nagenda, grounded in the fundamental principles of humanity and solidarity that could bring\nreal change in the lives of refugees and the countries and communities that receive them.\nUNHCR looks forward to working closely with States and a wide range of partners to bring\nthe global compact on refugees to life through concrete actions on the ground.\n\n\n**16**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e5195043-6925-3b27-bc41-817a4d17dbca/5b7ea0514.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_121/raw/doc_121_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,182 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "## Nations Unies A/AC.96/1178\n\nDistr. g\u00e9n\u00e9rale\n## **Assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale**\n4 juillet 2018\nFran\u00e7ais\nOriginal: anglais et fran\u00e7ais\n\n\n**Comit\u00e9 ex\u00e9cutif du Programme**\n**du Haut Commissaire**\n**Soixante-neuvi\u00e8me session**\nGen\u00e8ve, 1 [er] au 5 octobre 2018\nPoint 4 a) de l\u2019ordre du jour provisoire\n**Examen des rapports sur les travaux du Comit\u00e9 permanent**\n**Protection internationale**\n\n### **Note sur la protection internationale**\n\n\n**Rapport du Haut Commissaire**\n\n\n_R\u00e9sum\u00e9_\n\n\nLa pr\u00e9sente note examine les d\u00e9veloppements en mati\u00e8re de protection internationale de\njuin 2017 \u00e0 juin 2018, p\u00e9riode importante tant pour les personnes relevant de la comp\u00e9tence\ndu HCR que pour les pays et les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil, \u00e9tant donn\u00e9 que la communaut\u00e9\ninternationale travaille \u00e0 l\u2019adoption d\u2019un Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s.\n\n\nD\u2019une mani\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, la note est structur\u00e9e autour du Cadre d\u2019action global pour les\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et des principaux \u00e9l\u00e9ments du projet de Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, rappelant la\ncentralit\u00e9 de la protection et refl\u00e9tant les d\u00e9veloppements pertinents sous l\u2019angle de la\nprotection et des solutions.\n\n\nEn outre, elle examine la situation des d\u00e9placements internes dans le monde, \u00e0 l\u2019occasion\ndu vingti\u00e8me anniversaire des Principes directeurs relatifs au d\u00e9placement de personnes \u00e0\nl\u2019int\u00e9rieur de leur propre pays, ainsi que la situation des apatrides.\n\n\nSauf indication contraire, les documents cit\u00e9s dans la pr\u00e9sente note sont disponibles \u00e0\n[www.refworld.org.](http://www.refworld.org/)\n\n\nGE.18-11062 (F)\n# \uf02a\uf031\uf038\uf031\uf031\uf030\uf036\uf032\uf02a\uf020\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n#### Table des mati\u00e8res\n\n\n_Chapitre_ _Paragraphes_ _Page_\n\n\nI. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-5 3\n\n\nII. Centralit\u00e9 de la protection ....................................................................................... 6-17 3\n\n\nIII. Partage de la charge et des responsabilit\u00e9s .............................................................. 18-21 7\n\n\nIV. Accueil et admission ............................................................................................... 22-36 8\n\n\nA. Admission ....................................................................................................... 22-23 8\n\n\nB. Accueil et satisfaction des besoins sp\u00e9cifiques ............................................... 24-31 9\n\n\nC. Identification des personnes ayant besoin de protection internationale .......... 32-36 11\n\n\nV. Satisfaire les besoins et soutenir les communaut\u00e9s ................................................. 37-44 12\n\n\nA. \u00c9ducation ........................................................................................................ 38-39 12\n\n\nB. Emploi et moyens d\u2019existence ........................................................................ 40-42 13\n\n\nC. Documentation et identit\u00e9 juridique ................................................................ 43-44 14\n\n\nVI. Solutions ................................................................................................................ 45 15\n\n\nA. Rapatriement volontaire .................................................................................. 46-50 15\n\n\nB. R\u00e9installation .................................................................................................. 51-55 16\n\n\nC. Int\u00e9gration locale ............................................................................................ 56-58 17\n\n\nD. Autres voies d\u2019admission ................................................................................ 59-61 18\n\n\nVII. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 62 18\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n#### **I. Introduction**\n\n\n1. En 2017, le nombre de personnes contraintes de fuir leur pays \u00e0 cause des\npers\u00e9cutions, des violations des droits de l\u2019homme, des conflits arm\u00e9s, des violences et des\ntroubles \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public, relevant du mandat du HCR, est pass\u00e9 \u00e0 19,9 millions, alors qu\u2019il\n\u00e9tait de 17,9 millions en fin 2016. En outre 5,4 millions de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s palestiniens rel\u00e8vent du\nmandat de l\u2019Office de secours et de travaux des Nations Unies et 40 millions d\u2019autres\npersonnes se sont d\u00e9plac\u00e9es \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de leur propre pays.\n\n\n2. L\u2019\u00e9clatement de la violence en R\u00e9publique centrafricaine, la poursuite des combats\nen R\u00e9publique arabe syrienne et au Y\u00e9men, et le conflit associ\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire en\nSomalie et au Soudan du Sud ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 provoquer des d\u00e9placements. Dans le m\u00eame\ntemps, de nouveaux mouvements internes et transfrontaliers ont \u00e9t\u00e9 aliment\u00e9s par\nl\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9, notamment au Burundi, en R\u00e9publique d\u00e9mocratique du Congo, en Iraq, en\nLibye, au Myanmar et dans les r\u00e9gions septentrionales et centrales du Mali. La d\u00e9t\u00e9rioration\nde la situation au Venezuela (R\u00e9publique bolivarienne du) a \u00e9galement provoqu\u00e9 le\nd\u00e9placement de V\u00e9n\u00e9zu\u00e9liens \u00e0 travers les fronti\u00e8res, portant \u00e0 plus de 1,5 million le\nnombre d\u2019arriv\u00e9es dans les pays voisins depuis 2014. M\u00eame si l\u2019accord de paix en\nColombie a \u00e9t\u00e9 une avanc\u00e9e importante, plusieurs r\u00e9gions ont \u00e9t\u00e9 touch\u00e9es par le trafic de\ndrogue, l\u2019exploitation mini\u00e8re ill\u00e9gale et la pr\u00e9sence de groupes arm\u00e9s. Entre ao\u00fbt 2017 et\navril 2018, les violences et les graves violations des droits de l\u2019homme dans le nord de\nl\u2019\u00c9tat de Rakhine au Myanmar ont contraint environ 687 000 Rohingya apatrides \u00e0 fuir le\npays, dans l\u2019une des situations de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s ayant connu l\u2019\u00e9volution la plus rapide en deux\nd\u00e9cennies. En Afghanistan, la violence et l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 provoquer des\nd\u00e9placements, remettant en cause la durabilit\u00e9 des retours.\n\n\n3. Dans ce contexte, le r\u00e9gime international de protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s demeure plus\nque jamais important. Dans le cadre du suivi de la D\u00e9claration de New York pour les\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et les migrants (D\u00e9claration de New York), adopt\u00e9e en septembre 2016 par\nl\u2019Assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, des parties prenantes se sont r\u00e9unies en 2017 pour des discussions\nth\u00e9matiques en vue de proposer des id\u00e9es pour le Pacte mondial. S\u2019inspirant de plus de 65\nann\u00e9es de droit et de pratique, des premi\u00e8res le\u00e7ons tir\u00e9es de l\u2019application du Cadre\nd\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et des r\u00e9sultats des consultations formelles ayant eu lieu en\n2018 entre les \u00c9tats, le Pacte mondial vise \u00e0 combler les d\u00e9faillances actuellement\nconstat\u00e9es dans la r\u00e9ponse internationale pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, afin notamment d\u2019assurer un\npartage plus \u00e9quitable et plus pr\u00e9visible de la charge et des responsabilit\u00e9s entre les \u00c9tats,\ngr\u00e2ce \u00e0 une approche multipartite. L\u2019ann\u00e9e 2018 est donc importante pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s ainsi\nque les pays et les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil. Elle marque par ailleurs le vingti\u00e8me\nanniversaire des Principes directeurs relatifs au d\u00e9placement de personnes \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de\nleur propre pays.\n\n\n4. Cette ann\u00e9e, la note sur la protection internationale se focalise sur la centralit\u00e9 de la\nprotection ayant sous-tendu les pr\u00e9paratifs pour le Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Organis\u00e9e\nd\u2019une mani\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9rale autour des principaux domaines du projet du Pacte mondial, elle\nd\u00e9crit les d\u00e9veloppements ayant eu lieu dans le monde de juin 2017 \u00e0 juin 2018.\n\n#### **II. Centralit\u00e9 de la protection**\n\n\n5. La protection est au centre de toute r\u00e9ponse humanitaire. Dans la pratique, elle\nsuppose des activit\u00e9s visant \u00e0 garantir le plein respect des droits des personnes, dans le\nrespect du droit international humanitaire et du droit international relatif aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et aux\ndroits de l\u2019homme. En d\u2019autres termes, la r\u00e9ponse humanitaire am\u00e9liore l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 ces droits,\nque ce soit au d\u00e9but d\u2019une situation d\u2019urgence, dans des situations prolong\u00e9es ou lors de la\nrecherche de solutions. Les consid\u00e9rations relatives \u00e0 la protection impr\u00e8gnent les actions\nhumanitaires en faveur des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et d\u2019autres personnes ayant besoin de la protection\ninternationale, des apatrides et des d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes. Elles doivent commencer avec le\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "renforcement des cadres juridiques gr\u00e2ce auxquels leurs droits sont garantis, sans toutefois\ns\u2019y limiter.\n\n\n6. Le cadre juridique de protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s repose essentiellement sur la\nConvention de 1951 relative au statut des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s (Convention de 1951) et son protocole\nde 1967, ainsi que sur des instruments r\u00e9gionaux sp\u00e9cifiques. Il s\u2019inspire des instruments\ninternationaux pertinents relatifs aux droits de l\u2019homme, du droit international humanitaire\net d\u2019autres normes juridiques internationales. Conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 son mandat, le HCR\ncontinue \u00e0 travailler avec les \u00c9tats pour encourager l\u2019adh\u00e9sion \u00e0 la Convention de 1951 et \u00e0\nd\u2019autres instruments pertinents, et orienter quant \u00e0 leur interpr\u00e9tation et leur application,\nnotamment par l\u2019engagement dans des processus l\u00e9gislatifs et judiciaires nationaux et\nr\u00e9gionaux. L\u2019Organisation a soutenu l\u2019\u00e9laboration, par la Ligue des \u00c9tats arabes, de la\nConvention arabe sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s ainsi que la r\u00e9forme du Syst\u00e8me europ\u00e9en commun\nd\u2019asile. Des d\u00e9veloppements prometteurs au plan l\u00e9gislatif ont eu lieu gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 l\u2019application\ndu Cadre d\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, notamment \u00e0 Djibouti et en \u00c9thiopie.\n\n\n7. Le HCR a soutenu la mise au point de la l\u00e9gislation nationale dans pr\u00e8s de 80 pays.\nPour orienter l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation et l\u2019application des normes juridiques de protection, le HCR a\npubli\u00e9 le texte intitul\u00e9 \u00ab _Guidelines on international protection on the applicability of_\n_Article 1D of the 1951 Convention to Palestinian refugees\u201d (Guidelines on International_\n_Protection No. 13)_ \u00bb (Principes directeurs sur la protection internationale relatifs \u00e0\nl\u2019applicabilit\u00e9 de l\u2019article 1D de la Convention de 1951 aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s palestiniens (Principes\ndirecteurs sur la protection internationale n [o] 13)). L\u2019Organisation a \u00e9galement publi\u00e9\nbeaucoup de documents juridiques d\u2019orientation et des orientations sp\u00e9cifiques aux pays sur\nl\u2019\u00e9ligibilit\u00e9. En novembre 2017, le HCR a sign\u00e9 un m\u00e9morandum d\u2019entente avec le March\u00e9\ncommun du Sud (MERCOSUR) pour promouvoir le droit international relatif aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s\net l\u2019adh\u00e9sion aux instruments internationaux de protection, ainsi que des activit\u00e9s\ncommunes pour la protection des personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es et des apatrides. \u00c0 la suite de\nconsultations nationales avec les gouvernements et la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile dans le cadre de\nl\u2019\u00e9valuation triennale du Plan d\u2019action du Br\u00e9sil, trois consultations th\u00e9matiques sousr\u00e9gionales se sont tenues, principalement sur la qualit\u00e9 de l\u2019asile, l\u2019\u00e9radication de l\u2019apatridie\net les solutions globales, compl\u00e9mentaires et durables. Comme contribution \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9laboration\ndu Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, les \u00c9tats d\u2019Am\u00e9rique latine et des Cara\u00efbes ont publi\u00e9 un\ndocument (intitul\u00e9 \u00ab _100 points of Brasilia_ \u00bb [1] ) contenant beaucoup de bonnes pratiques.\n\n\n8. Le HCR a travaill\u00e9 avec les \u00c9tats et les partenaires sur l\u2019identification des\npopulations apatrides et la lutte contre l\u2019apatridie, conform\u00e9ment aux instruments\ninternationaux pertinents, et sur des actions visant \u00e0 mettre fin \u00e0 l\u2019apatridie, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 la\ncampagne #J\u2019appartiens. Il s\u2019est surtout efforc\u00e9 d\u2019encourager l\u2019adh\u00e9sion aux conventions\nrelatives \u00e0 l\u2019apatridie et la r\u00e9forme des lois relatives \u00e0 la nationalit\u00e9. Cette r\u00e9forme\ncomprend des mesures visant \u00e0 promouvoir l\u2019\u00e9galit\u00e9 entre l\u2019homme et la femme sur l\u2019octroi\nde la nationalit\u00e9 \u00e0 leurs enfants, comme \u00e0 Madagascar et en Sierra Leone, et \u00e0 simplifier les\nproc\u00e9dures administratives concernant notamment l\u2019enregistrement des actes d\u2019\u00e9tat civil.\nPendant la p\u00e9riode couverte par la note, le Chili a adh\u00e9r\u00e9 \u00e0 la Convention de 1954 relative\nau statut des apatrides et \u00e0 la Convention de 1961 sur la r\u00e9duction des cas d\u2019apatridie. Le\nBurkina Faso et le Luxembourg ont adh\u00e9r\u00e9 \u00e0 la Convention de 1961. Cuba a supprim\u00e9\nl\u2019exigence de r\u00e9sidence pour l\u2019acquisition de la nationalit\u00e9 cubaine par les enfants n\u00e9s \u00e0\nl\u2019\u00e9tranger de parents cubains, et la Colombie a mis en place, conform\u00e9ment aux instruments\nr\u00e9gionaux et internationaux, un m\u00e9canisme pour appliquer les garanties permettant\nd\u2019emp\u00eacher que les enfants ne naissent apatrides. Le Br\u00e9sil, le Costa Rica et l\u2019\u00c9quateur ont\npubli\u00e9 des r\u00e8glements pour favoriser les efforts visant \u00e0 identifier et prot\u00e9ger les apatrides,\net \u00e0 r\u00e9duire les cas d\u2019apatridie, notamment sur la naturalisation. En 2017, un nombre\nimportant de personnes, qui \u00e9taient apatrides ou dont la nationalit\u00e9 n\u2019\u00e9tait pas d\u00e9termin\u00e9e,\nse sont vu octroyer ou confirmer la nationalit\u00e9, notamment en Indon\u00e9sie, en Iraq, aux\nPhilippines et en Tha\u00eflande, ainsi que dans divers pays d\u2019Asie centrale.\n\n\n1 Disponible \u00e0 www.acnur.org/fileadmin/scripts/doc.php?file=fileadmin/Documentos/BDL/2018/11590\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**4**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**5**\n\n\n\n9. Au niveau r\u00e9gional, le Plan d\u2019action de Banjul sur l\u2019\u00e9radication de l\u2019apatridie\n2017-2024, adopt\u00e9 par la Communaut\u00e9 \u00e9conomique des \u00c9tats de l\u2019Afrique de l\u2019Ouest et\nentr\u00e9 en vigueur en juin 2017, pr\u00e9voit des mesures concr\u00e8tes et un calendrier pr\u00e9cis. Depuis\nson entr\u00e9e en vigueur, le Burkina Faso et le Mali ont adopt\u00e9 des plans d\u2019action nationaux\npour \u00e9radiquer l\u2019apatridie. En octobre 2017, les \u00c9tats membres de la Conf\u00e9rence\ninternationale sur la r\u00e9gion des Grands Lacs ont sign\u00e9 une D\u00e9claration sur l\u2019\u00e9radication de\nl\u2019apatridie les engageant \u00e0 r\u00e9former les politiques et les lois relatives \u00e0 la nationalit\u00e9. Une\nr\u00e9union minist\u00e9rielle sur l\u2019appartenance et l\u2019identit\u00e9 juridique s\u2019est tenue en f\u00e9vrier 2018\nen Tunisie sous le patronage du Pr\u00e9sident. Convoqu\u00e9e par La ligue des \u00c9tats arabes, en\npartenariat avec le HCR, cette r\u00e9union a abouti \u00e0 l\u2019adoption d\u2019une d\u00e9claration lan\u00e7ant des\nappels en faveur du droit \u00e0 une identit\u00e9 juridique pour les enfants et de l\u2019\u00e9galit\u00e9 des droits\nrelatifs \u00e0 la nationalit\u00e9 entre l\u2019homme et la femme. Les pays abritant les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s syriens,\ntravaillant \u00e9troitement avec le HCR et les partenaires, ont pu r\u00e9duire le pourcentage\nd\u2019enfants syriens sans pi\u00e8ces depuis la naissance, le faisant passer de 35 % \u00e0 2,5 % au cours\ndes cinq derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es.\n\n\n10. Les personnes ayant \u00e9t\u00e9 contraintes aux d\u00e9placements, qui n\u2019ont pas encore\nrecherch\u00e9 ou obtenu la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 dans un autre pays, font \u00e9galement face aux probl\u00e8mes de\nprotection. Les Principes directeurs relatifs au d\u00e9placement de personnes \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de\nleur propre pays, mis au point en 1998, continuent d\u2019offrir un cadre international important\npour la protection des d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes. L\u2019engagement du HCR dans les d\u00e9placements\ninternes date de plus de 45 ans, et a \u00e9t\u00e9 reconnu par des r\u00e9solutions successives de\nl\u2019Assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale. Au plan mondial, le HCR dirige les groupes charg\u00e9s de la protection,\ndes abris ainsi que de la coordination et de la gestion des camps. Il dirige aussi 25 des 35\ngroupes nationaux charg\u00e9s de la protection et d\u2019autres m\u00e9canismes de coordination\ninterinstitutions pour la protection, notamment en R\u00e9publique centrafricaine, en Iraq, au\nNig\u00e9ria, au Soudan du Sud et en R\u00e9publique arabe syrienne. En septembre 2017, il a\nfinalis\u00e9 une revue de son engagement dans les situations de d\u00e9placement interne, en vue de\ntravailler d\u2019une mani\u00e8re plus pr\u00e9visible dans tous les aspects du d\u00e9placement.\n\n\n11. En Afghanistan, le HCR a renforc\u00e9 la protection des d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0\nl\u2019assistance en nature, aux interventions en esp\u00e8ces pour couvrir les d\u00e9penses m\u00e9dicales et\nla fourniture de l\u2019aide juridique. Dans les Am\u00e9riques, l\u2019Organisation a contribu\u00e9 \u00e0\nd\u00e9velopper les capacit\u00e9s locales au Honduras pour renforcer les droits fonciers et de\npropri\u00e9t\u00e9 et faciliter les solutions. Elle a aid\u00e9 les autorit\u00e9s salvadoriennes \u00e0 \u00e9tablir le profil\ndes d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes, afin d\u2019am\u00e9liorer la base de preuves et de permettre une r\u00e9ponse\nefficace. En Afrique, le HCR a travaill\u00e9 avec des partenaires dans la r\u00e9gion du Kasa\u00ef en\nR\u00e9publique d\u00e9mocratique du Congo pour collecter les donn\u00e9es sur les d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes et\nleur vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 un suivi r\u00e9gional. Au Moyen-Orient, il a favoris\u00e9 des campagnes\nd\u2019information visant \u00e0 permettre aux d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes de conna\u00eetre leur droit de vote, et a\nfacilit\u00e9 le scrutin dans des camps et des zones d\u2019installation. Les efforts d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s par\nl\u2019Ukraine pour r\u00e9soudre le probl\u00e8me de d\u00e9placement interne ont abouti \u00e0 l\u2019adoption d\u2019une\nstrat\u00e9gie d\u2019int\u00e9gration et de solution, avec l\u2019aide du HCR.\n\n\n12. Dans certaines r\u00e9gions, la d\u00e9gradation de l\u2019environnement, les catastrophes\nnaturelles et les effets n\u00e9fastes du changement climatique, notamment la s\u00e9cheresse, ont\nexacerb\u00e9 les d\u00e9placements et modifi\u00e9 leur caract\u00e8re et leur complexit\u00e9, comme observ\u00e9\ndans le bassin du Lac Tchad et la Corne de l\u2019Afrique. S\u2019appuyant sur son expertise au plan\nnormatif et son exp\u00e9rience au plan op\u00e9rationnel, le HCR a travaill\u00e9 avec les \u00c9tats et des\npartenaires pour prot\u00e9ger et assister les personnes touch\u00e9es par ces ph\u00e9nom\u00e8nes. Il a aussi\nfourni de l\u2019appui technique aux parties \u00e0 la Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les\nchangements climatiques concernant les aspects du changement climatique relatifs \u00e0 la\nmobilit\u00e9 humaine, gr\u00e2ce notamment \u00e0 sa participation \u00e0 l\u2019\u00c9quipe sp\u00e9ciale sur les\nd\u00e9placements du M\u00e9canisme international de Varsovie relatif aux pertes et pr\u00e9judices. Le\nHCR, l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Georgetown et l\u2019Organisation internationale pour les migrations\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "(OIM) ont mis au point un ensemble d\u2019outils [2] permettant d\u2019accompagner les\ngouvernements dans les processus de relocalisation planifi\u00e9s, \u00e0 caract\u00e8re participatif et\nmen\u00e9s selon une approche ax\u00e9e sur les droits, en faveur des personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es ou\nexpos\u00e9es aux risques. Au vu de l\u2019attention accrue pour les d\u00e9placements li\u00e9s aux\nchangements climatiques, aux catastrophes et aux risques naturels, le HCR a command\u00e9 un\nrapport sur les d\u00e9fis et les opportunit\u00e9s dans ce domaine [3] .\n\n\n13. La protection va au-del\u00e0 de la promotion de l\u2019adoption de normes juridiques et\nint\u00e8gre les activit\u00e9s visant \u00e0 garantir leur respect dans la pratique. Toutefois, l\u2019action\nhumanitaire devrait, non pas se substituer aux m\u00e9canismes communautaires de protection,\nmais les soutenir conform\u00e9ment aux principes de partenariat et de redevabilit\u00e9. Les\nconsultations avec les personnes relevant la comp\u00e9tence du HCR sont essentielles pour\nassurer leur implication dans l\u2019identification et la satisfaction de leurs besoins ainsi que les\nsolutions. Ces consultations ont eu lieu dans les op\u00e9rations \u00e0 travers le monde pour \u00e9clairer\nla planification et la r\u00e9ponse aux d\u00e9placements de la part des \u00c9tats, du HCR et des\npartenaires.\n\n\n14. En mars 2018, le HCR a mis \u00e0 jour sa politique en mati\u00e8re d\u2019\u00e2ge, de genre et de\ndiversit\u00e9 pour veiller \u00e0 ce que les personnes relevant de sa comp\u00e9tence puissent participer\nd\u2019une mani\u00e8re significative aux d\u00e9cisions touchant leurs vies. Cette politique tient compte\ndu fait que le d\u00e9placement et l\u2019apatridie affectent les gens de diverses mani\u00e8res, et qu\u2019il\nfaudrait analyser et comprendre les consid\u00e9rations personnelles pour que les r\u00e9ponses soient\nefficaces. Elle propose des actions concr\u00e8tes pour mettre en \u0153uvre les programmes tenant\ncompte de l\u2019\u00e2ge, du genre et de la diversit\u00e9, et mesurer leurs r\u00e9sultats, notamment la\ncollecte de donn\u00e9es distinctes ; la participation et l\u2019inclusion ; la communication et la\ntransparence ; le retour d\u2019information et la r\u00e9ponse ; l\u2019\u00e9galit\u00e9 des sexes dans la prise des\nd\u00e9cisions, la gestion et la direction communautaires. Elle couvre l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 la\ndocumentation, \u00e0 l\u2019assistance, aux possibilit\u00e9s \u00e9conomiques et aux services globaux visant\n\u00e0 pr\u00e9venir et lutter contre les violences sexuelles et de genre.\n\n\n15. Encourager la participation de jeunes r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s est rest\u00e9 un point essentiel pour le\nHCR. Le Conseil consultatif mondial du HCR pour les jeunes a propos\u00e9 des\nrecommandations pour le Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, notamment lors des discussions\nth\u00e9matiques ayant eu lieu en 2017. Dans la r\u00e9gion Moyen-Orient et Afrique du Nord\n(MENA), le HCR et le Fonds des Nations Unies pour l\u2019enfance (UNICEF) ont organis\u00e9 des\nconsultations nationales pour les jeunes impliquant des autorit\u00e9s publiques, la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile\net des repr\u00e9sentants de jeunes d\u00e9plac\u00e9s, pour rechercher les possibilit\u00e9s d\u2019am\u00e9liorer les\nprogrammes pour les jeunes. Au Pakistan, l\u2019Initiative _Refugee Affected and Hosting Areas_ a\nmis l\u2019accent sur la responsabilisation des jeunes par l\u2019\u00e9ducation, la formation\nprofessionnelle et l\u2019appui pour les moyens d\u2019existence. Le Fonds de l\u2019initiative du HCR\npour les jeunes a permis de soutenir plus de 40 projets en mati\u00e8re de protection, dirig\u00e9s par\ndes jeunes, en mettant l\u2019accent sur l\u2019engagement des jeunes et la coh\u00e9sion sociale. Des\ninitiatives sportives contribuent \u00e9galement \u00e0 promouvoir l\u2019inclusion sociale ainsi que des\nespaces s\u00fbrs pour les enfants et les jeunes. Parmi ces initiatives, on peut citer la mise en\nplace par le Comit\u00e9 international olympique d\u2019une Fondation olympique pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s\net la Campagne #SignAndPass du HCR et de la Fondation du Football Club de Barcelone.\n\n\n16. La lutte contre la discrimination et les st\u00e9r\u00e9otypes n\u00e9fastes li\u00e9s au genre constitue un\nautre domaine inextricablement li\u00e9 \u00e0 la protection. Le HCR a men\u00e9 des initiatives visant \u00e0\nassurer la coh\u00e9sion sociale et \u00e0 mettre fin aux clivages culturels. Ces initiatives\ncomprennent l\u2019appui aux festivals alimentaires pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans 13 villes d\u2019Europe et\n\n\n[2 Disponible \u00e0 http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/596f1bb47/planned-relocation-](http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/596f1bb47/planned-relocation-toolbox.html)\n\ntoolbox.html.\n3 Disponible \u00e0 http://www.unhcr.org/protection/environment/596f25467/unhcr-climate-change\ndisasters-displacement.html.\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**6**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nla poursuite de la s\u00e9rie _No Stranger Place_, \u00e9tablissant le profil de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et de leurs\nfamilles d\u2019accueil par de puissants r\u00e9cits m\u00e9diatiques [4] .\n\n#### **III. Partage de la charge et des responsabilit\u00e9s**\n\n\n17. En fin 2017, environ 85 % des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans le monde \u00e9taient accueillis par les pays\nen d\u00e9veloppement, faisant face \u00e0 des difficult\u00e9s \u00e9conomiques et ayant le moins de\nressources pour \u00eatre en mesure de r\u00e9pondre aux d\u00e9fis. Le principe du partage de la charge et\ndes responsabilit\u00e9s est fond\u00e9 sur le droit international. Il s\u2019explique par le fait que l\u2019accueil\nd\u2019un grand nombre de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s exerce souvent des pressions sur les pays affect\u00e9s et qu\u2019une\nr\u00e9ponse satisfaisante ne saurait \u00eatre assur\u00e9e sans une coop\u00e9ration internationale. Demeure\nessentiel, l\u2019\u00e9largissement de la base d\u2019appui pour la protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s \u00e0 travers\nl\u2019ensemble de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 et entre les parties prenantes au plan national, r\u00e9gional et\ninternational.\n\n\n18. Des progr\u00e8s satisfaisants ont \u00e9t\u00e9 observ\u00e9s dans l\u2019application du Cadre d\u2019action\nglobal pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, actuellement en cours dans 14 pays. Des approches r\u00e9gionales en\nAfrique et dans les Am\u00e9riques, dirig\u00e9es par les pays concern\u00e9s avec l\u2019appui de la\ncommunaut\u00e9 internationale, se sont r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9es \u00eatre efficaces pour r\u00e9gler les situations tant\nnouvelles que prolong\u00e9es. Conform\u00e9ment aux engagements pris en mars 2017 dans la\nD\u00e9claration et le Plan d\u2019action de Nairobi, les \u00c9tats membres de l\u2019Autorit\u00e9\nintergouvernementale pour le d\u00e9veloppement (IGAD) ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 suivre une approche\nr\u00e9gionale globale pour les solutions durables en faveur des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s somaliens, avec des\npolitiques d\u2019asile plus harmonis\u00e9es, la promotion de l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux services publics,\nl\u2019\u00e9laboration de politiques relatives aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s hors des camps et la promotion du droit au\ntravail. Le Cadre r\u00e9gional global de protection et de solutions (connu sous son acronyme\nespagnol \u00ab MIRPS \u00bb), contenu dans la D\u00e9claration de San Pedro Sula d\u2019octobre 2017, met\nen place un m\u00e9canisme permettant de renforcer la protection et d\u2019am\u00e9liorer les solutions,\ngr\u00e2ce \u00e0 une approche multipartite, sur la base des m\u00e9canismes r\u00e9gionaux de coop\u00e9ration et\nde partage de la charge et des responsabilit\u00e9s. Au Moyen-Orient, le HCR et le Programme\ndes Nations Unies pour le d\u00e9veloppement (PNUD) ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 diriger le Plan r\u00e9gional\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et r\u00e9silience (3RP) pour la crise syrienne, coordonnant plus de 240 partenaires qui\nsoutiennent les r\u00e9ponses nationales dans cinq principaux pays d\u2019accueil. Le 3RP et la\nStrat\u00e9gie de solutions pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s afghans (SSAR) constituent de bons mod\u00e8les pour\nl\u2019application des r\u00e9ponses globales pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s.\n\n\n19. Conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l\u2019approche multipartite soulign\u00e9e dans la D\u00e9claration de New\nYork, le HCR a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 mettre en \u0153uvre une coop\u00e9ration renforc\u00e9e avec les acteurs du\nd\u00e9veloppement. Son partenariat avec le Groupe de la Banque mondiale a \u00e9t\u00e9 renforc\u00e9,\nnotamment par un accord visant \u00e0 mettre en place un centre commun de donn\u00e9es sur le\nd\u00e9placement forc\u00e9. Le sous-guichet IDA-18 de la Banque mondiale pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s,\nconsacr\u00e9 aux pays \u00e0 faible revenu et le M\u00e9canisme mondial de financement concessionnel\npour les pays \u00e0 revenu interm\u00e9diaire ont jou\u00e9 un r\u00f4le d\u00e9cisif dans l\u2019appui en faveur de\npolitiques plus inclusives pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et dans le renforcement des institutions. Les\nd\u00e9veloppements souhait\u00e9s comprennent \u00e9galement la publication, par le Comit\u00e9 d'aide au\nd\u00e9veloppement de l\u2019Organisation de coop\u00e9ration et de d\u00e9veloppement \u00e9conomiques\n(OCDE), des orientations sur la gestion des d\u00e9placements forc\u00e9s gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 la planification et\nla coop\u00e9ration pour le d\u00e9veloppement, ainsi que la publication d\u2019une communication\nconjointe du PNUD et du HCR fixant les param\u00e8tres de coop\u00e9ration entre les deux\norganisations. Le R\u00e9seau de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile MENA sur le d\u00e9placement, soutenu par le\nHCR, a organis\u00e9 des consultations sur l\u2019op\u00e9rationnalisation et le renforcement de\nl\u2019approche engageant l\u2019ensemble de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9, en vue de promouvoir la protection,\nl\u2019assistance et l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux solutions.\n\n\n4 Voir www.unhcr.org/en-us/no-stranger-place.html.\n\n\n**7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "20. Se sont aussi intensifi\u00e9s, les efforts visant \u00e0 engager d\u2019autres acteurs comme les\nvilles et les municipalit\u00e9s, ainsi que les partenaires du secteur priv\u00e9. Dans le cadre de\nl\u2019initiative \u00ab _Cities of Solidarity_ \u00bb dans les Am\u00e9riques, qui s\u2019appuie sur le Plan d\u2019action du\nBr\u00e9sil, les \u00c9tats ont mis au point les crit\u00e8res de d\u00e9signation des villes de solidarit\u00e9. La\npremi\u00e8re r\u00e9union de la Coalition pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en Europe qui vise \u00e0 r\u00e9unir les\nrepr\u00e9sentants de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans divers pays europ\u00e9ens et leur permettre de se faire entendre,\na \u00e9t\u00e9 organis\u00e9e avec l\u2019appui de la mairie de Milan et de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile. Le secteur priv\u00e9,\nnotamment des entreprises, des philanthropes et des fondations, ont contribu\u00e9 activement\naux discussions, faisant profiter de leur grande exp\u00e9rience en mati\u00e8re de technologie,\nd\u2019emplois, de formation professionnelle, d\u2019\u00e9nergies renouvelables et d\u2019autres domaines. Le\ncamp d\u2019Azraq en Jordanie est devenu le premier camp des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s aliment\u00e9 gr\u00e2ce aux\n\u00e9nergies renouvelables, financ\u00e9 gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 la campagne _Brighter Lives for Refugees_ de la\nFondation IKEA. En novembre 2017, le HCR et l\u2019Association europ\u00e9enne de l\u2019\u00e9lectricit\u00e9\nont convenu de travailler ensemble pour fournir une \u00e9nergie fiable, durable et propre aux\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 l\u2019appui du HCR, des groupes d\u2019employeurs et de travailleurs ont plaid\u00e9 en\nfaveur des droits des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, des d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes et des migrants dans le processus\nmenant \u00e0 l\u2019adoption en juin 2017 par la Conf\u00e9rence internationale du travail de la\n[Recommandation 205 sur l\u2019emploi et le travail d\u00e9cent pour la r\u00e9silience et la paix. Le HCR](http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO:12100:P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:3330503:NO)\na sign\u00e9 une lettre d\u2019intention avec la Chambre de commerce internationale sur la\ncollaboration en mati\u00e8re d\u2019infrastructures, d\u2019\u00e9ducation et d\u2019emploi. Les chambres de\ncommerce \u00e0 travers le monde peuvent soutenir les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans l\u2019acc\u00e8s au march\u00e9 du\ntravail et la promotion de l\u2019appui du secteur priv\u00e9.\n\n#### **IV. Accueil et admission**\n\n\n**A.** **Admission**\n\n\n21. Le principe de non-refoulement constitue la pierre angulaire du r\u00e9gime international\nde protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Il est interdit d\u2019expulser ou de renvoyer, de quelque mani\u00e8re que\nce soit, un r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 au-del\u00e0 des fronti\u00e8res o\u00f9 sa vie ou sa libert\u00e9 pourrait \u00eatre menac\u00e9e.\nD\u2019une mani\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, il prescrit aux \u00c9tats de garantir aux personnes sollicitant la\nprotection internationale l\u2019acc\u00e8s au territoire et aux proc\u00e9dures \u00e9quitables et efficaces\nd\u2019asile ou aux m\u00e9canismes de protection bas\u00e9s sur le groupe, surtout en cas d\u2019afflux massif.\nLe principe de non-refoulement est un compl\u00e9ment logique au droit de solliciter et\nd\u2019obtenir l\u2019asile, reconnu \u00e0 l\u2019article 14 de la D\u00e9claration universelle des droits de l\u2019homme,\ndont le soixante-dixi\u00e8me anniversaire sera c\u00e9l\u00e9br\u00e9 en 2018. Il est renforc\u00e9 par les\nobligations li\u00e9es au non-refoulement qu\u2019impose le droit international relatif aux droits de\nl\u2019homme.\n\n\n22. Le principe de non-refoulement et le droit de solliciter et d\u2019obtenir l\u2019asile ont\ncontinu\u00e9 \u00e0 \u00eatre respect\u00e9s par la plupart des \u00c9tats, notamment gr\u00e2ce au maintien des\npolitiques d\u2019ouverture des fronti\u00e8res. En Am\u00e9rique latine, par exemple, le Br\u00e9sil, la\nColombie et le P\u00e9rou ont gard\u00e9 leurs fronti\u00e8res ouvertes aux personnes venues du\nVenezuela (R\u00e9publique bolivarienne du), tout comme le Bangladesh pour recevoir les\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s du Myanmar et l\u2019Ouganda accueillant les personnes fuyant le conflit au Soudan du\nSud. Dans le m\u00eame temps, il y a eu des cas o\u00f9 les personnes d\u00e9sireuses de demander l\u2019asile\nn\u2019ont pas \u00e9t\u00e9 en mesure de le faire, soit parce qu\u2019on les a emp\u00each\u00e9es de quitter le pays, soit\nparce que l\u2019admission leur a \u00e9t\u00e9 refus\u00e9e aux fronti\u00e8res avec des barri\u00e8res physiques et\nadministratives. Dans certaines r\u00e9gions, les mines et d\u2019autres engins explosifs, interdits par\nle droit international humanitaire, emp\u00eachent les d\u00e9placements \u00e0 travers les fronti\u00e8res. Le\nHCR a coop\u00e9r\u00e9 avec ses partenaires, notamment le Service de la lutte antimines de l'ONU,\npour sensibiliser aux mines. Certains pays ont de plus en plus recours aux mesures\nrestrictives de gestion frontali\u00e8re limitant la possibilit\u00e9 de rechercher la s\u00e9curit\u00e9. Des\ncentaines de milliers de personnes ont essay\u00e9 d\u2019emprunter des voies terrestres et maritimes\ndangereuses, et beaucoup de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et de migrants ont disparu ou perdu leur vie en mer.\nLe traitement des demandes hors du territoire et le transfert forc\u00e9 des demandeurs d\u2019asile\ndans des pays tiers, o\u00f9 leur protection internationale n\u2019est pas garantie, sont rest\u00e9s une\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**8**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nsource de pr\u00e9occupation et ont remis en cause la coop\u00e9ration internationale et le partage des\nresponsabilit\u00e9s.\n\n\n**B.** **Accueil et satisfaction des besoins sp\u00e9cifiques**\n\n\n23. Certaines r\u00e9gions ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 faire face \u00e0 des d\u00e9fis li\u00e9s aux mouvements mixtes,\navec beaucoup de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s se d\u00e9pla\u00e7ant de mani\u00e8re irr\u00e9guli\u00e8re aux c\u00f4t\u00e9s des migrants. Des\nefforts sont d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s au plan international pour am\u00e9liorer la gestion des migrations, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0\nl\u2019\u00e9laboration d\u2019un Pacte mondial pour des migrations s\u00fbres, ordonn\u00e9es et r\u00e9guli\u00e8res. Le\nHCR soutient activement le processus, comme pr\u00e9vu dans la D\u00e9claration de New York.\nS\u2019appuyant sur le Plan d\u2019action en dix points pour la protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et les\nmigrations mixtes, le HCR continue \u00e0 renforcer la coop\u00e9ration op\u00e9rationnelle avec ses\npartenaires ; \u00e0 am\u00e9liorer l\u2019information, l\u2019analyse et les connaissances ; \u00e0 promouvoir les\nbonnes pratiques afin d\u2019aider les \u00c9tats et d\u2019autres parties prenantes \u00e0 r\u00e9pondre plus\nefficacement aux mouvements mixtes. Il soutient notamment des dispositifs permettant\nd\u2019identifier, d\u2019examiner et d\u2019orienter les nouvelles arriv\u00e9es vers les services appropri\u00e9s, en\nfonction des besoins et ind\u00e9pendamment du statut des personnes concern\u00e9es. En Europe, le\nHCR a mis au point un syst\u00e8me \u00e9largi de gestion des informations sur le suivi de la\nprotection, afin de d\u2019assurer une collecte syst\u00e9matique et une harmonisation des\ninformations sur les probl\u00e8mes de protection rencontr\u00e9s par les demandeurs d\u2019asile aux\nfronti\u00e8res ou pr\u00e8s de celles-ci. Le syst\u00e8me soutiendra des interventions de protection ax\u00e9e\nsur des preuves, la coordination transfrontali\u00e8re et des initiatives de plaidoyer.\n\n\n24. Les mouvements mixtes par mer sont demeur\u00e9s un d\u00e9fi permanent. Le long de la\nroute de la M\u00e9diterran\u00e9e occidentale, les arriv\u00e9es en Europe ont plus que doubl\u00e9 en 2017,\npour d\u00e9passer le chiffre de 28 000. Si la M\u00e9diterran\u00e9e centrale est la route dominante,\nsurtout \u00e0 partir de Libye, un nombre limit\u00e9 de personnes ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 traverser la\nM\u00e9diterran\u00e9e orientale. Dans ce contexte, l\u2019un des \u00e9l\u00e9ments importants de la strat\u00e9gie du\nHCR pour la M\u00e9diterran\u00e9e centrale est le m\u00e9canisme de transit pour l\u2019\u00e9vacuation. Cr\u00e9\u00e9 en\nfin 2017 au Niger, avec l\u2019appui du Gouvernement nig\u00e9rien et de la Commission\neurop\u00e9enne, en coop\u00e9ration avec l\u2019OIM, ce m\u00e9canisme permet un traitement ordonn\u00e9 des\ndemandes faites par les demandeurs d\u2019asile et les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s \u00e9vacu\u00e9s de Libye. En plus de son\nengagement op\u00e9rationnel renforc\u00e9, le HCR a fait du Groupe restreint pour la M\u00e9diterran\u00e9e\ncentrale une plateforme permettant de recueillir l\u2019engagement des \u00c9tats \u00e0 offrir des voies\nl\u00e9gales et s\u00fbres d\u2019admission. Il a \u00e9galement mis au point un ensemble de recommandations\npour les \u00c9tats en vue de pr\u00e9venir et de combattre la traite d\u2019\u00eatres humains et les abus\nconnexes le long des routes vers la Libye et l\u2019Europe. En fin 2017, il a lanc\u00e9 la deuxi\u00e8me\nphase d\u2019une campagne de sensibilisation aux dangers de la travers\u00e9e de la Mer Rouge et du\nGolfe d\u2019Aden vers le Y\u00e9men, notamment \u00e0 la probabilit\u00e9 accrue d\u2019\u00eatre victime de la traite\nd\u2019\u00eatres humains et d\u2019autres abus, en mettant en lumi\u00e8re les r\u00e9cits des survivants. La\nsituation Y\u00e9men demeure hautement complexe, avec d\u2019importants d\u00e9fis humanitaires et\ns\u00e9curitaires ainsi que des d\u00e9placements internes \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle, en plus des arriv\u00e9es\nconstantes de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans le cadre de mouvements mixtes.\n\n\n25. Les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et les autres personnes en d\u00e9placement font face aux violences\nsexuelles et de genre, notamment \u00e0 la violence domestique, aux s\u00e9vices sexuels et au viol.\nLes mesures positives de lutte contre ces fl\u00e9aux comprennent des strat\u00e9gies visant \u00e0\npr\u00e9venir et \u00e0 combattre les violences sexuelles et de genre ; le recrutement d\u2019hommes et\nfemmes r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s pour patrouiller dans les camps et les centres d\u2019accueil, signaler les cas \u00e0\nla police et contribuer au maintien de l\u2019ordre public ; et la mise en place de cl\u00f4tures, de\nl\u2019\u00e9clairage et des installations sanitaires et des lieux de couchage s\u00e9par\u00e9s et de meilleure\nqualit\u00e9 pour les femmes et pour les hommes. Des espaces s\u00fbrs pour les femmes et les\nenfants expos\u00e9s aux risques ont \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 cr\u00e9\u00e9s dans beaucoup de r\u00e9gions, en plus\nd\u2019autres approches visant \u00e0 satisfaire les besoins sp\u00e9cifiques des femmes et des filles,\ncomme l\u2019utilisation d\u2019agents de sant\u00e9 et d\u2019interpr\u00e8tes de sexe f\u00e9minin. Dans les Am\u00e9riques,\nle R\u00e9seau r\u00e9gional d\u2019espaces s\u00fbrs est pass\u00e9 de trois \u00e0 cinq pays membres, dont la Colombie\net le Venezuela (R\u00e9publique bolivarienne du). En Italie, le HCR a contribu\u00e9 \u00e0 la mise au\npoint de proc\u00e9dures op\u00e9rationnelles permanentes pour aider les victimes de la torture et a\n\n**9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "adopt\u00e9 une strat\u00e9gie de lutte contre les violences sexuelles et de genre. En Gr\u00e8ce, le HCR et\nle minist\u00e8re de l\u2019int\u00e9rieur ont sign\u00e9 un m\u00e9morandum d\u2019entente pour soutenir les femmes et\nles enfants r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s expos\u00e9s aux risques. Un rapport du HCR sur les pratiques prometteuses\nen mati\u00e8re d\u2019\u00e9galit\u00e9 entre les sexes pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s syriens dans la r\u00e9gion Moyen-Orient et\nAfrique du Nord a mis en exergue les initiatives men\u00e9es avec succ\u00e8s, y compris les mesures\nvisant \u00e0 lutter contre les violences sexuelles et de genre. Le HCR a \u00e9galement publi\u00e9 une\nrecherche sur la pr\u00e9valence des violences sexuelles et de genre contre les gar\u00e7ons et les\nhommes dans la situation syrienne, et a not\u00e9 que le travail de l\u2019enfant augmente l\u2019exposition\naux violences sexuelles et de genre. Le recours strat\u00e9gique \u00e0 la r\u00e9installation a permis de\ntrouver des solutions pour les cas urgents de protection, concernant souvent les personnes\nayant surv\u00e9cu aux violences sexuelles et de genre.\n\n\n26. Le HCR a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 mettre l\u2019accent sur les besoins sp\u00e9cifiques des victimes de la\ntraite d\u2019\u00eatres humains et sur les mesures visant \u00e0 lutter contre ce ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne. Pour renforcer\nla coop\u00e9ration \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, le HCR, l\u2019OIM et _Heartland Alliance_ ont codirig\u00e9 une \u00e9quipe\nsp\u00e9ciale du groupe mondial charg\u00e9 de la protection sur la lutte contre la traite d\u2019\u00eatres\nhumains. Le HCR participe \u00e9galement au Groupe interinstitutions de coordination contre la\ntraite de personnes. Il a contribu\u00e9 au texte intitul\u00e9 \u00ab _Issues brief no. 3 on trafficking in_\n_persons and refugee status_ \u00bb (Bulletin n [o] 3 sur la traite de personnes et le statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9)\net a fourni aux \u00c9tats et aux praticiens des recommandations pratiques sur les liens entre la\ntraite d\u2019\u00eatres humains et la protection des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Il a aid\u00e9 les \u00c9tats \u00e0 appliquer d\u2019une\nmani\u00e8re coh\u00e9rente les proc\u00e9dures d\u2019asile et d\u2019autres proc\u00e9dures visant \u00e0 prot\u00e9ger les\nvictimes de la traite d\u2019\u00eatres humains. Le document intitul\u00e9 \u00ab _Joint guidelines for the_\n_identification of victims of trafficking among asylum-seekers_ \u00bb (Orientations conjointes\npour l\u2019identification des victimes de la traite d\u2019\u00eatres humains parmi les demandeurs d\u2019asile)\na \u00e9t\u00e9 mis au point en coop\u00e9ration avec la Commission nationale pour l\u2019asile d\u2019Italie, ce qui\na donn\u00e9 lieu \u00e0 une orientation accrue vers les proc\u00e9dures nationales.\n\n\n27. En 2017, environ 52 % des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans le monde \u00e9taient des enfants. L\u2019Argentine,\nle Br\u00e9sil et le Panama ont mis en place de nouveaux protocoles nationaux pour veiller \u00e0 ce\nque les enfants aient acc\u00e8s aux proc\u00e9dures d\u2019asile, compte tenu de leur int\u00e9r\u00eat sup\u00e9rieur et\nde la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de promouvoir le regroupement familial et les alternatives \u00e0 la d\u00e9tention.\nEl Salvador et le Honduras ont introduit des proc\u00e9dures interinstitutionnelles pour l\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat\nsup\u00e9rieur de l\u2019enfant en vue de renforcer la capacit\u00e9 d\u2019identification et de r\u00e9ponse en faveur\ndes enfants expos\u00e9s \u00e0 des risques \u00e9lev\u00e9s au nord de l\u2019Am\u00e9rique centrale.\n\n\n28. Pour pr\u00e9server l\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat sup\u00e9rieur de l\u2019enfant, le HCR a travaill\u00e9 avec ses partenaires\npour soutenir des arrangements sp\u00e9cifiques pour les enfants, notamment des arrangements\nalternatifs de soins pour ceux s\u00e9par\u00e9s de leurs familles, des dispositions pour la tutelle, des\nproc\u00e9dures de d\u00e9termination de l\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat sup\u00e9rieur, de l\u2019appui psychosocial et, si possible,\nl\u2019inclusion d\u2019enfants r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les syst\u00e8mes nationaux de protection de l\u2019enfant.\nPlusieurs pays ont accord\u00e9 la priorit\u00e9 aux besoins sp\u00e9ciaux des enfants non accompagn\u00e9s,\nnotamment le Br\u00e9sil et la Serbie. En Europe, le HCR, l\u2019UNICEF, et le Comit\u00e9 international\nde secours ont mis en place un processus consultatif permettant de soutenir les \u00c9tats dans le\nrenforcement des r\u00e9ponses en mati\u00e8re de protection pour les enfants non accompagn\u00e9s et\ns\u00e9par\u00e9s. Le HCR, l\u2019Organisation internationale du travail (OIT) et l\u2019UNICEF ont mis au\npoint un cadre strat\u00e9gique r\u00e9gional pour lutter contre le travail de l\u2019enfant dans la situation\nsyrienne, avec un accent sur la promotion de la protection de l\u2019enfant ; les moyens\nd\u2019existence et l\u2019assistance en esp\u00e8ces pour les familles ; et l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 une \u00e9ducation de\nqualit\u00e9. Le HCR a soutenu les efforts d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s par les \u00c9tats et ses partenaires pour\nregrouper les membres de famille, et a plaid\u00e9 en faveur d\u2019approches souples lorsqu\u2019il s\u2019agit\nde d\u00e9terminer qui fait partie de la famille. L\u2019Allemagne, qui autorise le regroupement\nfamilial aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s auxquels elle accorde la protection, est assist\u00e9e par l\u2019OIM au Liban et\nen Turquie dans la facilitation des proc\u00e9dures de visa.\n\n\n29. Une meilleure pratique \u00e9tatique suppose des alternatives \u00e0 la d\u00e9tention pour les\npersonnes ayant besoin de protection internationale. Ces alternatives comprennent la mise\nen libert\u00e9 sous la garde des institutions locales et le logement ouvert en liaison avec les\norganismes de bien-\u00eatre, modalit\u00e9s assorties de l\u2019exigence de se pr\u00e9senter. La d\u00e9tention\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**10**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nd\u2019enfants pour des motifs li\u00e9s \u00e0 l\u2019immigration n\u2019est jamais consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme \u00e9tant dans\nleur int\u00e9r\u00eat sup\u00e9rieur, quel que soit leur statut juridique ou migratoire, ou celui de leurs\nparents, car elle compromet gravement leur bien-\u00eatre et leur \u00e9panouissement. Dans le cadre\nde la strat\u00e9gie mondiale du HCR visant \u00e0 mettre fin \u00e0 la d\u00e9tention, un certain nombre de\npays ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 faire part de pratiques positives, avec notamment peu de cas de\nd\u00e9tention d\u2019enfants en Lituanie, en Malaisie et au Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et\nd\u2019Irlande du Nord. Dans beaucoup de cas, les alternatives concernant les enfants et leurs\nfamilles ont \u00e9t\u00e9 appliqu\u00e9es. Toutefois, les demandeurs d\u2019asile ont malheureusement\ncontinu\u00e9 \u00e0 \u00eatre d\u00e9tenus dans beaucoup de pays, sans que des alternatives soient examin\u00e9es.\nDes d\u00e9fis li\u00e9s aux conditions d\u2019accueil persistent aussi, notamment le surpeuplement et\nl\u2019absence de capacit\u00e9s pour identifier et assister les personnes ayant des besoins\nsp\u00e9cifiques. Est particuli\u00e8rement inqui\u00e9tante, la situation sur les \u00eeles grecques de la mer\n\u00c9g\u00e9e o\u00f9 des milliers de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s vivent dans des conditions inappropri\u00e9s et font face \u00e0 des\nrisques de protection.\n\n\n**C.** **Identification des personnes ayant besoin de protection internationale**\n\n\n30. Des syst\u00e8mes efficaces d\u2019enregistrement permettent aux \u00c9tats d\u2019identifier les\nnouvelles arriv\u00e9es, surtout dans le cadre des d\u00e9placements massifs, afin de veiller \u00e0\nl\u2019int\u00e9grit\u00e9 des syst\u00e8mes de protection et de pr\u00e9venir la fraude et la corruption.\nL\u2019enregistrement facilite l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 l\u2019assistance et l\u2019identification des besoins sp\u00e9cifiques, et\nfournit des informations indispensables pour les solutions. Le Br\u00e9sil a introduit de\nnouveaux formulaires d\u2019enregistrement qui permettent de mieux r\u00e9unir les donn\u00e9es sur les\ndemandeurs d\u2019asile et leur vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 afin d\u2019\u00e9tablir les priorit\u00e9s entre les cas. En Gr\u00e8ce,\nles autorit\u00e9s ont progressivement accru leur pr\u00e9sence dans les centres d\u2019enregistrement et\nd\u2019identification, et ont de ce fait permis au HCR de r\u00e9duire son engagement op\u00e9rationnel,\nen continuant d\u2019assurer le r\u00f4le de contr\u00f4le. En mai 2018, le HCR avait enregistr\u00e9 de fa\u00e7on\nbiom\u00e9trique 5,3 millions de personnes dans 50 op\u00e9rations. Un outil de distribution dans le\nmonde, utilisant la biom\u00e9trie pour v\u00e9rifier l\u2019identit\u00e9 au point de distribution d\u2019aliments, est\nutilis\u00e9 dans plusieurs pays, y compris tr\u00e8s r\u00e9cemment au Br\u00e9sil et en Ouganda. Le HCR a\ncontribu\u00e9 \u00e0 la mise au point des recommandations sur les statistiques de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, adopt\u00e9es\nen mars 2018 par la Commission de statistique de l\u2019ONU, qui encourage les donn\u00e9es\ndistinctes par \u00e2ge et par sexe sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, les demandeurs d\u2019asile et les d\u00e9plac\u00e9s\ninternes.\n\n\n31. La Convention de 1951 ne s\u2019\u00e9tend pas sur les proc\u00e9dures de d\u00e9termination du statut\nde r\u00e9fugi\u00e9. Il est pourtant g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement reconnu que des proc\u00e9dures \u00e9quitables et efficaces\nde d\u00e9termination \u00e0 titre individuel du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 sont essentielles pour une application\npleine et inclusive de la Convention de 1951 et d\u2019autres conventions r\u00e9gionales, hormis les\nsituations \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle. Des proc\u00e9dures \u00e9quitables, efficaces et adaptables de\nd\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 exigent des institutions \u00e9tatiques solides pour garantir\nleur int\u00e9grit\u00e9 et parvenir \u00e0 des d\u00e9cisions appropri\u00e9es, conformes au droit international. Dans\nles situations \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle, la reconnaissance prima facie bas\u00e9e sur le groupe et, si\nn\u00e9cessaire, les m\u00e9canismes de protection temporaire, ont \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 utilis\u00e9s par les \u00c9tats\navec l\u2019appui du HCR.\n\n\n32. Lorsque les \u00c9tats s\u2019engagent \u00e0 faire passer, du HCR aux institutions nationales, la\nresponsabilit\u00e9 pour la d\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9, un engagement soutenu est\nn\u00e9cessaire. Cela peut supposer l\u2019\u00e9laboration d\u2019une l\u00e9gislation nationale pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s.\nL\u2019Indon\u00e9sie et la Tha\u00eflande ont pris les premi\u00e8res mesures visant \u00e0 assumer leurs\nresponsabilit\u00e9s concernant la d\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 tandis que d\u2019autres \u00c9tats\ncomme le Cameroun, le Maroc et la Turquie ont davantage progress\u00e9 \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard. Le HCR\ncontinue \u00e0 soutenir les institutions \u00e9tatiques charg\u00e9es de la d\u00e9termination du statut de\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9, notamment gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 ses initiatives d\u2019assurance qualit\u00e9 en Europe et en Am\u00e9rique\nlatine. Conform\u00e9ment au Cadre d\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, il recherche les approches\nsoutenant les syst\u00e8mes \u00e9tatiques de d\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 d\u2019une mani\u00e8re\nholistique, notamment par l\u2019\u00e9valuation et le renforcement des capacit\u00e9s. Lorsque le HCR\nentreprend la d\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 en vertu de son mandat, en lieu et place\n\n**11**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "d\u2019un syst\u00e8me \u00e9tatique fonctionnel, son engagement repose sur l\u2019impact potentiel en mati\u00e8re\nde protection, au vu de sa capacit\u00e9 \u00e0 permettre aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s d\u2019avoir acc\u00e8s \u00e0 leurs droits et de\ntrouver des solutions. Les mouvements mixtes pr\u00e9sentent des d\u00e9fis sp\u00e9cifiques pour la\nd\u00e9termination des besoins internationaux de protection. Le recours responsable aux\nmodalit\u00e9s diff\u00e9renci\u00e9es de traitement de cas apr\u00e8s examen, comme les proc\u00e9dures\nacc\u00e9l\u00e9r\u00e9es et simplifi\u00e9es, et la fusion des entretiens d\u2019enregistrement et de d\u00e9termination du\nstatut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9 pour les cas b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiant de la pr\u00e9somption d\u2019inclusion, permettent\nd\u2019assurer l\u2019\u00e9quit\u00e9 et l\u2019efficacit\u00e9. Le HCR a soutenu beaucoup d\u2019\u00c9tats s\u2019effor\u00e7ant de r\u00e9duire\nles cas en attente de d\u00e9termination du statut de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9, notamment par des mesures visant \u00e0\nassurer la qualit\u00e9 et l\u2019efficacit\u00e9 de la prise de d\u00e9cisions.\n\n\n33. La d\u00e9termination du statut d\u2019apatride est \u00e9galement fond\u00e9e en droit international.\nElle permet aux \u00c9tats de remplir leur engagement pris dans le cadre de la Convention de\n1954 relative au statut des apatrides. Pour \u00eatre efficaces, les proc\u00e9dures doivent tenir\ncompte des facteurs sp\u00e9cifiques aux pays, comme la taille et la diversit\u00e9 estim\u00e9es de la\npopulation apatride et la complexit\u00e9 des questions juridiques et de preuves devant \u00eatre\nexamin\u00e9es. Le HCR a salu\u00e9 les d\u00e9cisions prises par le Br\u00e9sil, l\u2019\u00c9quateur et le Mont\u00e9n\u00e9gro\nd\u2019\u00e9tablir des proc\u00e9dures de d\u00e9termination du statut d\u2019apatride.\n\n\n34. Les consid\u00e9rations nationales relatives \u00e0 la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 et \u00e0 la protection internationale\ndes r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s peuvent et doivent \u00eatre compl\u00e9mentaires. Conscient du fait que les \u00c9tats\nd\u2019accueil peuvent b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier des approches int\u00e9gr\u00e9es, qui prot\u00e8gent les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en\ngarantissant la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale, le HCR et le Comit\u00e9 international de la Croix-Rouge ont\nmis au point un aide-m\u00e9moire fournissant des orientations op\u00e9rationnelles sur le maintien\ndu caract\u00e8re civil et humanitaire des sites et zones d\u2019installation de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et de d\u00e9plac\u00e9s\ninternes.\n\n#### **V. Satisfaire les besoins et soutenir les communaut\u00e9s**\n\n\n35. Jusqu\u2019\u00e0 ce que les solutions soient disponibles, le renforcement de l\u2019autonomie\npermet aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, non pas de d\u00e9pendre de leur pays d\u2019accueil, mais de contribuer \u00e0 son\nd\u00e9veloppement. Il les pr\u00e9pare aux solutions durables, notamment le rapatriement volontaire.\nLe HCR encourage l\u2019autonomie, et ce, dans l\u2019esprit de l\u2019engagement contenu dans\nl\u2019Agenda 2030 pour le d\u00e9veloppement durable de ne pas faire de laiss\u00e9s-pour-compte,\nl\u2019engagement du Sommet humanitaire mondial en faveur d\u2019une \u00ab nouvelle m\u00e9thode de\ntravail \u00bb et du Cadre d\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. L\u2019abandon des pratiques ant\u00e9rieures\nde confinement dans des camps et de services parall\u00e8les pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s t\u00e9moigne de la\nreconnaissance accrue des avantages que comporte le soutien de l\u2019acc\u00e8s des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s aux\nsyst\u00e8mes nationaux, notamment d\u2019\u00e9ducation et de sant\u00e9 ainsi qu\u2019au march\u00e9 du travail. De\ntelles approches r\u00e9duisent la vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 et renforcent le capital humain en b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiant aux\ncommunaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 des services et syst\u00e8mes renforc\u00e9s. Lorsque l\u2019assistance\nhumanitaire est fournie, elle doit l\u2019\u00eatre de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier aux communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil,\ny compris si possible par des prestataires locaux. Beaucoup de pays, dont l\u2019\u00c9thiopie, la\nR\u00e9publique islamique d\u2019Iran, le Kenya, le Pakistan, l\u2019Ouganda et la Zambie, sont rest\u00e9s\nconstants dans leur g\u00e9n\u00e9rosit\u00e9 envers les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et ont pris des mesures pour promouvoir\nl\u2019autonomie, notamment par l\u2019\u00e9ducation, la formation professionnelle et les moyens\nd\u2019existence. M\u00eame si une autonomie accrue exige souvent des changements de politiques,\nles efforts doivent \u00eatre poursuivis de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 contribuer aux infrastructures, aux services\net aux \u00e9conomies des communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil.\n\n\n**A.** **\u00c9ducation**\n\n\n36. Conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 la Convention de 1951, aux objectifs de d\u00e9veloppement durable et\nau Cadre d\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, le HCR a plaid\u00e9 pour l\u2019inclusion des enfants et\njeunes r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les syst\u00e8mes \u00e9ducatifs nationaux. Avec l\u2019appui du programme _Educate_\n_A Child_, il a travaill\u00e9 pour \u00e9tendre l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux \u00e9tudes primaires, d\u00e9passant le double de son\nobjectif de 2017. L\u2019apprentissage en ligne, combin\u00e9 aux plateformes num\u00e9riques avec\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**12**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nl\u2019enseignement classique dans des salles de classe, a permis des \u00e9tudes sup\u00e9rieures \u00e0\n3 500 r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en Afghanistan, au Tchad, en Iraq, en Jordanie, au Kenya, au Malawi, au\nRwanda, au Sri Lanka, au Soudan et en Tha\u00eflande. De plus, 6 700 bourses ont \u00e9t\u00e9 octroy\u00e9es\npar l\u2019Initiative acad\u00e9mique allemande Albert Einstein pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s (DAFI) en vue de\nsoutenir les \u00e9tudes sup\u00e9rieures pour les \u00e9tudiants r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans 50 pays. En d\u00e9cembre 2017,\nles \u00c9tats membres de l\u2019IGAD ont adopt\u00e9 la D\u00e9claration de Djibouti, les engageant \u00e0 inclure\nles r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les plans nationaux d\u2019\u00e9ducation ici \u00e0 2020. En avril 2018, la D\u00e9claration\nde Nairobi a cr\u00e9\u00e9 de nouveaux engagements pour les \u00c9tats de rendre les syst\u00e8mes \u00e9ducatifs\nplus inclusifs pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s.\n\n\n37. Le HCR a continu\u00e9 de soutenir une inscription \u00e9largie pour des \u00e9tudes formelles,\navec un accroissement du taux mondial d\u2019inscription dans le primaire, qui est pass\u00e9 de 50\n% en 2016 \u00e0 61 % en 2017. Un programme ciblant les jeunes a \u00e9t\u00e9 lanc\u00e9 au Kenya, au\nPakistan, au Rwanda et en Ouganda, en vue d\u2019accro\u00eetre les possibilit\u00e9s de formation\nprofessionnelle et d\u2019\u00e9ducation, notamment postsecondaire. Dans les pays o\u00f9 il existe des\nbarri\u00e8res \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9ducation, comme la langue d\u2019enseignement, l\u2019absence de documents\nd\u2019identit\u00e9, les frais d\u2019\u00e9colage et le titre de s\u00e9jour, le HCR a salu\u00e9 les efforts d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s par\ndes \u00c9tats pour les lever, en particulier \u00e0 Belize, en \u00c9thiopie, en R\u00e9publique islamique\nd\u2019Iran, au Panama et en Turquie. \u00c0 S\u00e3o Paolo, l\u2019Assembl\u00e9e l\u00e9gislative a approuv\u00e9 un\nprojet de loi accordant la dispense de frais pour la validation des dipl\u00f4mes universitaires\nobtenus par les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Un accord de coop\u00e9ration r\u00e9gionale a \u00e9t\u00e9 sign\u00e9 avec l\u2019Organisation\ndes \u00c9tats ib\u00e9ro-am\u00e9ricains pour l\u2019\u00e9ducation, la science et la culture, en vue de faciliter\nl\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9ducation pour les personnes relevant la comp\u00e9tence du HCR dans les\nAm\u00e9riques. En d\u00e9cembre 2017, le HCR a lanc\u00e9 le Syst\u00e8me de gestion de l\u2019\u00e9ducation pour\nles r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, devant l\u2019aider \u00e0 g\u00e9rer les donn\u00e9es relatives \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9ducation pour une\nprogrammation et un suivi am\u00e9lior\u00e9s.\n\n\n**B.** **Emploi et moyens d\u2019existence**\n\n\n38. La fourniture aux personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es de l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux possibilit\u00e9s \u00e9conomiques et la\npromotion de leur inclusion contribuent aux \u00e9conomies des pays d\u2019accueil et permettent de\nrenforcer leur autonomie. Ces personnes peuvent ainsi satisfaire leurs besoins et se pr\u00e9parer\npour des solutions. La recommandation 205 de l\u2019OIT encourage les \u00c9tats \u00e0 promouvoir\nl\u2019autonomie des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s par l\u2019extension de l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux moyens d\u2019existence et au march\u00e9 du\ntravail, de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 soutenir les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil. En mati\u00e8re de d\u00e9placement, le\nHCR et l\u2019OIT coop\u00e8rent \u00e9troitement pour am\u00e9liorer l\u2019acc\u00e8s au march\u00e9 du travail et\nrenforcer l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la D\u00e9claration de l\u2019OIT sur les principes fondamentaux et les droits\nau travail, y compris l\u2019am\u00e9lioration des conditions de travail et de la protection sociale. Les\ndeux organisations travaillent aussi pour promouvoir un d\u00e9veloppement \u00e9conomique\ninclusif dans les pays d\u2019accueil, am\u00e9liorant les moyens d\u2019existence, tant pour les personnes\nd\u00e9plac\u00e9es que pour les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil.\n\n\n39. L\u2019acc\u00e8s des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s au march\u00e9 du travail et aux avantages de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale peut\nsubir les pressions de la situation \u00e9conomique et des difficult\u00e9s li\u00e9es au d\u00e9veloppement\nauxquels le pays d\u2019accueil fait face. Au vu de telles contraintes, les informations fiables\nsont n\u00e9cessaires sur l\u2019impact des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s sur le march\u00e9 du travail et les besoins de la\nmain-d\u2019\u0153uvre et des employeurs. Le HCR a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 travailler avec les \u00c9tats pour\ngarantir l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 la formation professionnelle, assurer la reconnaissance des dipl\u00f4mes, la\nlibert\u00e9 de mouvement et d\u00e9livrer des pi\u00e8ces. Le Costa Rica, l\u2019\u00c9quateur et le Mexique\ncoop\u00e8rent avec le secteur priv\u00e9 pour cr\u00e9er des possibilit\u00e9s d\u2019emploi pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. En\navril 2018, le HCR et l\u2019OCDE ont lanc\u00e9 un plan d\u2019action innovant et multipartite pour\ncollaborer avec les employeurs dans le recrutement des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s.\n\n\n40. En plus de renforcer la protection, les services financiers (y compris l\u2019assistance en\nesp\u00e8ces) facilitent l\u2019acc\u00e8s des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s aux possibilit\u00e9s de moyens d\u2019existence et au march\u00e9\ndu travail. Au Mexique, la Commission nationale des banques et des valeurs mobili\u00e8res\npermettra aux \u00e9trangers (y compris les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s) d\u2019utiliser les documents d\u00e9livr\u00e9s par\nl\u2019Institut national des migrations comme pi\u00e8ces d\u2019identit\u00e9 pour avoir acc\u00e8s aux services\n\n\n**13**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "financiers. En Zambie, la Banque centrale a accept\u00e9 de reconna\u00eetre les cartes d\u2019identit\u00e9 de\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9 comme preuve de l\u2019identit\u00e9 pour recevoir des subventions en esp\u00e8ces. En 2017, le\nHCR a fourni 502 millions de dollars E.-U. d\u2019assistance en esp\u00e8ces, dont le tiers avait \u00e9t\u00e9\nconsacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la satisfaction des besoins sp\u00e9cifiques dans 42 op\u00e9rations, notamment pour\nl\u2019\u00e9ducation, afin de faciliter le retour et de r\u00e9duire les strat\u00e9gies n\u00e9fastes d\u2019adaptation\ncomme les relations sexuelles transactionnelles et le travail de l\u2019enfant. L\u2019assistance en\nesp\u00e8ces, associ\u00e9e \u00e0 l\u2019assistance en nature et \u00e0 d\u2019autres services, ont permis au HCR et \u00e0 ses\npartenaires d\u2019assurer des r\u00e9ponses sp\u00e9cifiques aux contextes. Ils ont ainsi pu am\u00e9liorer les\nr\u00e9sultats en mati\u00e8re de protection, permettre aux personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es d\u2019\u00e9tablir les priorit\u00e9s\ndans leurs besoins et contribuer \u00e0 la r\u00e9silience gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 l\u2019inclusion socio-\u00e9conomique, l\u2019acc\u00e8s\naux services nationaux et aux programmes sociaux. Le HCR a renforc\u00e9 son partenariat,\nnotamment avec le Programme alimentaire mondial, pour \u00e9largir les interventions en\nesp\u00e8ces, et avec le Fonds d'\u00e9quipement des Nations Unies pour cr\u00e9er un fonds d\u2019assistance\ntechnique en vue de fournir des services financiers aux populations d\u00e9plac\u00e9es. Afin de\npromouvoir l\u2019inclusion financi\u00e8re des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, le HCR a renforc\u00e9 son partenariat avec\nl\u2019Agence su\u00e9doise de coop\u00e9ration internationale pour le d\u00e9veloppement en Jordanie et en\nOuganda, et avec _Financial Sector Deepening Africa_ au Rwanda.\n\n\n**C.** **Documentation et identit\u00e9 juridique**\n\n\n41. L\u2019enregistrement des actes d\u2019\u00e9tat civil est tr\u00e8s important pour les personnes\nd\u00e9plac\u00e9es. Il constitue un instrument majeur de protection, en particulier pour les femmes et\nles filles. Il permet d\u2019\u00e9tablir l\u2019identit\u00e9 juridique et de pr\u00e9venir l\u2019apatridie, et est\nindispensable pour avoir l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9ducation, \u00e0 l\u2019emploi, au logement et aux soins\nm\u00e9dicaux. Le Gouvernement \u00e9thiopien a adopt\u00e9 des mesures l\u00e9gislatives pour garantir\nl\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 l\u2019enregistrement des naissances et aux documents d\u2019\u00e9tat civil pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. En\n\u00c9quateur, le service d\u2019\u00e9tat civil a entam\u00e9 un processus d\u2019enregistrement des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s\nreconnus dans sa base de donn\u00e9es pour leur d\u00e9livrer des pi\u00e8ces d\u2019identit\u00e9 semblables \u00e0\ncelles d\u00e9livr\u00e9es aux nationaux. Le Pakistan a lanc\u00e9 une op\u00e9ration au niveau national pour\nenregistrer les Afghans sans pi\u00e8ces. Le Conseil ex\u00e9cutif de l\u2019Union africaine a adopt\u00e9 une\nd\u00e9cision exhortant les \u00c9tats membres \u00e0 inclure les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, les d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes et les\npersonnes expos\u00e9es aux risques d\u2019apatridie dans les syst\u00e8mes de statistiques vitales et\nd\u2019enregistrement des actes d\u2019\u00e9tat civil. \u00c0 une r\u00e9union du Conseil d\u2019\u00e9tat civil, d\u2019identit\u00e9 et\nde statistiques vitales de l\u2019Am\u00e9rique latine et des Cara\u00efbes, 17 directeurs de services d\u2019\u00e9tat\ncivil se sont accord\u00e9s sur le fait que la coop\u00e9ration r\u00e9gionale est n\u00e9cessaire pour donner une\nidentit\u00e9 juridique \u00e0 tous, notamment par l\u2019enregistrement universel des naissances. Ils se\nsont engag\u00e9s \u00e0 travailler \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9limination des causes d\u2019apatridie. Pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, la\nreconnaissance de l\u2019identit\u00e9 est essentielle \u00e0 la r\u00e9alisation d\u2019une solution durable. La preuve\nde l\u2019identit\u00e9 permet aux \u00c9tats d\u2019avoir des informations exactes sur les personnes vivant sur\nleur territoire, ce qui est n\u00e9cessaire pour la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 et l\u2019\u00e9laboration de plans \u00e9conomiques et\nsociaux. Le HCR travaille avec les \u00c9tats, le Groupe de la Banque mondiale et d\u2019autres\npartenaires pour renforcer les capacit\u00e9s nationales en mati\u00e8re d\u2019identification et\nd\u2019enregistrement des actes d\u2019\u00e9tat civil, et faciliter l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux personnes relevant de sa\ncomp\u00e9tence, y compris les groupes marginalis\u00e9s et vuln\u00e9rables. L\u2019acc\u00e8s aux documents\nd\u2019\u00e9tat civil, notamment aux actes de naissance, constitue une priorit\u00e9 dans le 3RP.\n\n\n42. Les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et les apatrides ont droit \u00e0 un document de voyage d\u00e9livr\u00e9 par le pays\nde r\u00e9sidence l\u00e9gale, qui favorise la libert\u00e9 d\u2019aller et venir ainsi que les solutions. En\noctobre 2017, le Comit\u00e9 ex\u00e9cutif a adopt\u00e9 une conclusion sur la protection internationale\n(n [o ] 114 (LXVIII)) relative aux documents de voyage lisibles \u00e0 la machine pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s\net les apatrides, et a reconnu leur importance et les bonnes pratiques dans leur d\u00e9livrance \u00e0\ntravers le monde. Pendant la p\u00e9riode consid\u00e9r\u00e9e, plusieurs pays sont pass\u00e9s aux documents\nlisibles \u00e0 la machine, r\u00e9affirmant ainsi la valeur de la conclusion pour les \u00c9tats, les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s\net les apatrides.\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**14**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n#### **VI. Solutions**\n\n\n43. La fin des d\u00e9placements exige des solutions adapt\u00e9es aux circonstances sp\u00e9cifiques\net aux besoins des populations, notamment les trois solutions durables classiques que sont\nle rapatriement volontaire, la r\u00e9installation et l\u2019int\u00e9gration locale, et d\u2019autres voies\nd\u2019admission dans des pays tiers offrant d\u2019autres possibilit\u00e9s de protection et de solution.\nPour consolider l\u2019engagement du HCR \u00e0 rechercher des solutions pour les personnes\nrelevant de sa comp\u00e9tence, une Division de la r\u00e9silience et des solutions a \u00e9t\u00e9 cr\u00e9\u00e9e. Hormis\nl\u2019appui \u00e0 l\u2019application du Cadre d\u2019action global pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, la Division fournira des\norientations dans des domaines essentiels comme l\u2019\u00e9ducation, les moyens d\u2019existence,\nl\u2019autonomie et la r\u00e9int\u00e9gration. Il mettra aussi l\u2019accent sur la collaboration avec les\npartenaires du d\u00e9veloppement et la promotion de l\u2019inclusion des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les services\nnationaux.\n\n\n**A.** **Rapatriement volontaire**\n\n\n44. Le rapatriement volontaire est la solution pr\u00e9f\u00e9r\u00e9e par beaucoup de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. S\u2019il\nincombe principalement aux pays d\u2019origine de permettre le rapatriement, un appui soutenu\nde la communaut\u00e9 internationale est n\u00e9cessaire pour promouvoir les conditions favorables \u00e0\nun retour s\u00fbr et durable. Tout d\u2019abord, il est important de reconna\u00eetre le droit au retour. Les\nfacteurs qui conditionnent habituellement la jouissance de ce droit comprennent la s\u00fbret\u00e9 et\nla s\u00e9curit\u00e9 ; la bonne gouvernance et l\u2019\u00e9tat de droit, y compris au niveau local ; l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux\nservices, en particulier aux soins de sant\u00e9 et \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9ducation ; la restitution des terres et des\nbiens, et l\u2019acc\u00e8s au logement, aux documents d\u2019\u00e9tat civil et aux possibilit\u00e9s de moyens\nd\u2019existence. Sont souvent n\u00e9cessaires pour favoriser le retour, les mesures prises par divers\nacteurs, notamment les activit\u00e9s visant \u00e0 restaurer la confiance et \u00e0 renforcer les capacit\u00e9s,\nle suivi efficace des personnes rapatri\u00e9es et des paquets de r\u00e9int\u00e9gration. Ces mesures ne\nsauraient cependant remplacer l\u2019engagement de l\u2019\u00c9tat et la volont\u00e9 politique de mettre fin\nau conflit et de restaurer la paix.\n\n\n45. Le Bangladesh et le Myanmar ont conclu au plan bilat\u00e9ral un \u00ab Arrangement pour le\nretour des personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es de l\u2019\u00c9tat de Rakhine \u00bb en novembre 2017 et un autre\n\u00ab Arrangement physique [correspondant] pour le rapatriement des r\u00e9sidents du Myanmar\nd\u00e9plac\u00e9s du Bangladesh \u00bb en janvier 2018. Ces arrangements \u00e9noncent les engagements\nimportants des deux gouvernements \u00e0 assurer aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s le retour volontaire, en s\u00e9curit\u00e9\net dans la dignit\u00e9 \u00e0 leur lieu d\u2019origine. M\u00eame si le HCR n\u2019est pas partie \u00e0 ces arrangements,\nil a sign\u00e9 en avril 2018 avec le Gouvernement du Bangladesh un m\u00e9morandum d\u2019entente\nsur le rapatriement volontaire en s\u00e9curit\u00e9 et dans la dignit\u00e9. Toutefois, le HCR consid\u00e8re\nque les conditions au Myanmar ne sont pas encore favorables \u00e0 un tel rapatriement. Il\nexhorte le Myanmar \u00e0 prendre des mesures concr\u00e8tes pour cr\u00e9er ces conditions,\nconform\u00e9ment aux recommandations de la Commission consultative sur l\u2019\u00c9tat de Rakhine,\nnotamment en s\u2019attaquant aux causes profondes des d\u00e9placements et en fournissant des\nvoies d\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 la citoyennet\u00e9. Le HCR est engag\u00e9 \u00e0 aider le Myanmar \u00e0 cr\u00e9er les\nconditions favorables \u00e0 un rapatriement volontaire, s\u00fbr et digne des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Depuis mars\n2018, il a engag\u00e9, avec le PNUD, des discussions avec le Gouvernement du Myanmar sur\nun m\u00e9morandum d\u2019entente tripartite relatif au rapatriement volontaire et sur la reprise et le\nd\u00e9veloppement pour toutes les communaut\u00e9s dans l\u2019\u00c9tat de Rakhine.\n\n\n46. En Iraq, la protection, notamment par des retours s\u00fbrs et durables, est indispensable\npour la reprise et la stabilisation. Le HCR a plaid\u00e9 en faveur de l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux documents\nd\u2019\u00e9tat civil et \u00e0 des informations exactes sur les conditions dans les lieux d\u2019origine. Il a\naussi soutenu les activit\u00e9s de regroupement familial. L\u2019application du Cadre d\u2019action global\npour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans la situation des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s somaliens a mis l\u2019accent sur la r\u00e9alisation\ndes solutions durables, en particulier la cr\u00e9ation des conditions favorables \u00e0 un retour\nvolontaire, s\u00fbr et digne. Cela suppose des mesures visant \u00e0 renforcer la s\u00e9curit\u00e9, \u00e0\nd\u00e9velopper les capacit\u00e9s des autorit\u00e9s et \u00e0 soutenir le plan national de d\u00e9veloppement du\npays concern\u00e9, pour le bien des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Avec l\u2019appui du Fonds de consolidation de la paix\ndes Nations Unies, un projet transfrontalier entre le Kenya et la Somalie vise \u00e0 am\u00e9liorer\n\n**15**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "l\u2019int\u00e9gration des personnes retourn\u00e9es en Somalie. De plus, un syst\u00e8me de suivi apr\u00e8s le\nretour a \u00e9t\u00e9 lanc\u00e9 en octobre 2017 pour \u00e9tablir le profil des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s somaliens retourn\u00e9s.\n\n\n47. En Afghanistan, le HCR a renforc\u00e9 son syst\u00e8me de suivi des retours. Toutefois, les\nretours durables sont devenus plus difficiles \u00e0 cause de la poursuite des violences, de\nl\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 et de la capacit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e d\u2019absorption dans les zones de retour en raison du\nmanque de moyens d\u2019existence, de la mauvaise gestion des terres et du manque d\u2019un abri\nappropri\u00e9. La cinqui\u00e8me r\u00e9union du Comit\u00e9 directeur quadripartite impliquant les\nR\u00e9publiques islamiques d\u2019Afghanistan, d\u2019Iran et du Pakistan ainsi que le HCR, a r\u00e9affirm\u00e9\nl\u2019importance de la Strat\u00e9gie de solutions pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s afghans en vue de soutenir le\nrapatriement volontaire, la r\u00e9int\u00e9gration durable et l\u2019assistance aux pays d\u2019accueil (SSAR).\nLes parties ont r\u00e9it\u00e9r\u00e9 leur engagement \u00e0 continuer de travailler ensemble pour faciliter le\nretour volontaire des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s afghans en s\u00e9curit\u00e9 et dans la dignit\u00e9, et \u00e0 mener ensemble\ndes efforts pour mobiliser les ressources. Le Comit\u00e9 ex\u00e9cutif afghan sur le d\u00e9placement et\nles personnes retourn\u00e9es a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 rassembler les principaux acteurs pour mettre au point\nune strat\u00e9gie permettant de r\u00e9duire l\u2019\u00e9cart entre l\u2019action humanitaire et l\u2019action de\nd\u00e9veloppement. Il a adopt\u00e9 une approche engageant l\u2019ensemble de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 pour r\u00e9gler les\nquestions comme la documentation, l\u2019enregistrement et les terres pour les personnes\nretourn\u00e9es. Le HCR et le Groupe de la Banque mondiale ont sign\u00e9 un accord de partage des\ndonn\u00e9es en vue de mieux soutenir la r\u00e9int\u00e9gration des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s afghans rapatri\u00e9s, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0\nune collecte et une analyse am\u00e9lior\u00e9es des donn\u00e9es.\n\n\n48. \u00c0 la suite de la r\u00e9union de la Commission tripartite pour le rapatriement volontaire\ndes r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s burundais, impliquant les gouvernements du Burundi et de la R\u00e9publique-Unie\nde Tanzanie, le HCR a aid\u00e9 en 2017 environ 13 000 personnes \u00e0 rentrer chez elles. Il a\nsoutenu le rapatriement volontaire de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire, au Mali, au Sri Lanka et au\nSoudan, entre autres. A suscit\u00e9 des inqui\u00e9tudes, le retour forc\u00e9 des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s au Nig\u00e9ria,\nmalgr\u00e9 les efforts et les engagements pris dans le cadre d\u2019arrangements tripartites,\nnotamment un accord entre le Gouvernement nig\u00e9rian, le Gouvernement camerounais, et le\nHCR. Au Honduras, un projet visant \u00e0 identifier les terres pouvant \u00e9ventuellement faire\nl\u2019objet de contestations dans les zones futures de retour a \u00e9t\u00e9 lanc\u00e9 avec l\u2019assistance\ntechnique de la Colombie.\n\n\n**B.** **R\u00e9installation**\n\n\n49. La r\u00e9installation est reconnue comme \u00e9tant, non seulement un outil strat\u00e9gique de\nprotection et de solution, mais aussi un m\u00e9canisme tangible de partage de la charge et des\nresponsabilit\u00e9s. Dans un contexte marqu\u00e9 par des d\u00e9placements forc\u00e9s \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle et\ndes difficult\u00e9s de protection et de solution dans le monde, les besoins de r\u00e9installation\nidentifi\u00e9s par le HCR ont consid\u00e9rablement augment\u00e9 depuis 2014. Actuellement, le\nnombre de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s ayant besoin d\u2019\u00eatre r\u00e9install\u00e9s a atteint le chiffre sans pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent de 1,2\nmillion.\n\n\n50. Contrairement \u00e0 2016, o\u00f9 les \u00c9tats avaient offert plus de 163 200 places pour la\nr\u00e9installation, l\u2019ann\u00e9e 2017 a connu une r\u00e9duction de 54 % pour tomber \u00e0 75 190 places.\nCette tendance \u00e0 la baisse des quotas mondiaux de r\u00e9installation devrait se poursuivre en\n2018. La r\u00e9duction a eu des effets sur la capacit\u00e9 du HCR \u00e0 r\u00e9pondre aux nouvelles\npriorit\u00e9s en mati\u00e8re de r\u00e9installation, notamment dans les pays le long de la route de la\nM\u00e9diterran\u00e9e centrale, et \u00e0 maintenir et \u00e9largir les possibilit\u00e9s de r\u00e9installation pour les\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s syriens et les personnes vuln\u00e9rables dans les pays d\u2019application du Cadre d\u2019action\nglobal pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Les places offertes par les \u00c9tats pour les cas urgents ayant continu\u00e9\n\u00e0 diminuer en 2017, le HCR n\u2019a pu pr\u00e9senter qu\u2019environ 2 090 cas dans ces cat\u00e9gories \u2013 ce\nqui repr\u00e9sente une diminution de 40 % par rapport \u00e0 2015. Il a n\u00e9anmoins pu veiller \u00e0 ce\nque plus de 10 % des cas pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s pour la r\u00e9installation en 2017 soient ceux des femmes et\nfilles expos\u00e9es aux risques.\n\n\n51. Le syst\u00e8me de r\u00e9installation a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 faire face \u00e0 des pressions li\u00e9es \u00e0 un accent\naccru sur la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale et au d\u00e9sir de certains \u00c9tats d\u2019utiliser la r\u00e9installation comme\nun outil de gestion des migrations. Cette situation a davantage remis en cause la capacit\u00e9 du\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**16**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\nHCR \u00e0 assurer la protection pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s les plus vuln\u00e9rables, notamment ceux expos\u00e9s\n\u00e0 des risques \u00e9lev\u00e9s de protection ou dont l\u2019\u00e9tat de sant\u00e9 est grave. L\u2019Organisation a plaid\u00e9\npour la poursuite des programmes de r\u00e9installation souples, diversifi\u00e9s et centr\u00e9s sur la\nprotection. Elle a notamment lanc\u00e9 des appels pour que le cadre propos\u00e9 de r\u00e9installation\nde l\u2019Union europ\u00e9enne veille \u00e0 ce que les possibilit\u00e9s de r\u00e9installation soient surtout\noffertes aux personnes les plus n\u00e9cessiteuses et qu\u2019elles contribuent effectivement au\npartage des responsabilit\u00e9s. D\u2019une mani\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, on esp\u00e8re que l\u2019adoption du Pacte\nmondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s donnera un nouvel \u00e9lan pour \u00e9largir la base d\u2019appui pour la\nr\u00e9installation dans les ann\u00e9es \u00e0 venir.\n\n\n52. Gr\u00e2ce au M\u00e9canisme conjoint d'appui aux pays de r\u00e9installation \u00e9mergents, le HCR\na aid\u00e9 six pays \u00e0 d\u00e9velopper leur capacit\u00e9, et leur a fourni des conseils techniques pour\nmettre au point ou \u00e9largir leurs programmes de r\u00e9installation et d\u2019admission pour des motifs\nhumanitaires. Il a \u00e9galement investi dans la nouvelle Initiative mondiale de parrainage des\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, qui encourage et soutient le parrainage communautaire, et a travaill\u00e9 avec certains\npays de r\u00e9installation sur les programmes de traitement des demandes \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur du pays,\nfavorables \u00e0 la protection, pour r\u00e9installer les d\u00e9plac\u00e9s internes extr\u00eamement vuln\u00e9rables du\nnord de l\u2019Iraq. \u00c0 El Salvador, au Guatemala et au Honduras, il a facilit\u00e9 la r\u00e9installation des\npersonnes expos\u00e9es \u00e0 des risques \u00e9lev\u00e9s, gr\u00e2ce au m\u00e9canisme de transfert pour la\nprotection.\n\n\n53. Suscitant l\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat d\u2019un nombre accru d\u2019\u00c9tats \u00e0 la r\u00e9installation, le HCR a continu\u00e9 \u00e0\nappliquer le mod\u00e8le du Groupe central sur la r\u00e9installation \u00e0 des situations sp\u00e9cifiques,\nnotamment pour les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s syriens et pour la situation en M\u00e9diterran\u00e9e centrale. Il est\n\u00e9galement entr\u00e9 en partenariat avec des \u00c9tats pour coordonner et mettre en \u0153uvre les\npossibilit\u00e9s de r\u00e9installation pr\u00e9visibles \u00e0 plus long terme pour des groupes particuliers de\nr\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Il a lanc\u00e9 un projet innovant de r\u00e9installation en vue d\u2019\u00e9valuer ses processus et de\nfaire l\u2019inventaire des bonnes pratiques sur le terrain. Au N\u00e9pal, le programme de\nr\u00e9installation \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle des Bhoutanais est arriv\u00e9 \u00e0 son terme, avec plus de\n112 000 r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s r\u00e9install\u00e9s dans des pays tiers au cours de la derni\u00e8re d\u00e9cennie.\n\n\n**C.** **Int\u00e9gration locale**\n\n\n54. Les pays qui soutiennent l\u2019int\u00e9gration locale des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s m\u00e9ritent d\u2019\u00eatre assist\u00e9s.\nBon nombre de pays, en particulier dans le monde industrialis\u00e9 et en Am\u00e9rique latine, ont\njug\u00e9 avantageux et int\u00e9ressant d\u2019opter pour l\u2019int\u00e9gration locale des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s, y compris en\nleur octroyant un statut l\u00e9gal durable et la naturalisation, comme pr\u00e9vu \u00e0 l\u2019article 34 de la\nConvention de 1951, si n\u00e9cessaire. En Guin\u00e9e-Bissau, le Gouvernement a d\u00e9cid\u00e9\nd\u2019accorder la nationalit\u00e9 aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en situation prolong\u00e9e. La Zambie a appliqu\u00e9 sa\nd\u00e9cision d\u2019accorder une r\u00e9sidence \u00e0 long terme aux anciens r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s rwandais. Au Chili,\nune initiative lanc\u00e9e en 2017 autorise l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 la nationalit\u00e9 aux personnes enregistr\u00e9es\nsous le statut d\u2019\u00e9tranger et aux enfants n\u00e9s des parents \u00e9trangers. Malgr\u00e9 ces avanc\u00e9es, des\nd\u00e9fis existent dans la mise en \u0153uvre des programmes d\u2019int\u00e9gration locale, surtout dans les\nsituations \u00e0 grande \u00e9chelle.\n\n\n55. Dans les Am\u00e9riques, les villes et les municipalit\u00e9s ont continu\u00e9 \u00e0 adopter des\npolitiques favorables \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9gration et \u00e0 l\u2019inclusion, avec l\u2019aide du secteur priv\u00e9. Par\nexemple, la municipalit\u00e9 de Quito a lanc\u00e9 un programme de certification des entreprises\nlocales r\u00e9pondant aux normes d\u2019inclusion. La ville de Mexico a sign\u00e9 un accord avec le\nHCR pour favoriser l\u2019inclusion des demandeurs d\u2019asile et des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les programmes\nde s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale. Des initiatives similaires ont \u00e9t\u00e9 men\u00e9es \u00e0 S\u00e3o Paolo. En Italie, le HCR\ntravaille avec les autorit\u00e9s locales et la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile pour encourager les bonnes relations\nentre les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil. La politique nationale d\u2019int\u00e9gration de\nl\u2019Italie a \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9labor\u00e9e en consultation avec les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Elle envisage des mesures\nsp\u00e9cifiques pour les demandeurs d\u2019asile concernant l\u2019accueil, le logement et l\u2019emploi. Dans\nl\u2019ex-R\u00e9publique yougoslave de Mac\u00e9doine, la strat\u00e9gie d\u2019int\u00e9gration des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s est\ncompl\u00e9t\u00e9e par des proc\u00e9dures sp\u00e9cifiques pour les enfants non accompagn\u00e9s ou consid\u00e9r\u00e9s\ncomme vuln\u00e9rables. En Pologne, la ville de Gdansk a mis au point un mod\u00e8le d\u2019int\u00e9gration\n\n\n**17**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "appliqu\u00e9e dans 11 autres villes en 2017. En avril 2018, l\u2019OCDE a publi\u00e9 la recherche de 72\nvilles sur les approches locales d\u2019int\u00e9gration, accompagn\u00e9e d\u2019une liste de contr\u00f4le devant\npermettre aux villes et r\u00e9gions de promouvoir l\u2019int\u00e9gration.\n\n\n56. Pour que les programmes d\u2019int\u00e9gration locale connaissent du succ\u00e8s, des efforts\ndoivent \u00eatre men\u00e9s par toutes les parties, y compris les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans leur volont\u00e9 de\ns\u2019adapter, les communaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil pour les recevoir et les institutions publiques pour la\nsatisfaction de leurs besoins. Dans certains pays, il est indispensable que la communaut\u00e9\ninternationale apporte un appui suppl\u00e9mentaire important, adapt\u00e9 aux besoins des\ncommunaut\u00e9s d\u2019accueil.\n\n\n**D.** **Autres voies d\u2019admission**\n\n\n57. D\u2019autres voies d\u2019admission des personnes ayant besoin de la protection\ninternationale peuvent faciliter l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 la protection et aux solutions, et all\u00e9ger la pression\nsur les pays d\u2019accueil, surtout dans les situations de grande ampleur et les situations\nprolong\u00e9es. Elles permettent aux r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s d\u2019apprendre de nouvelles techniques, de\npoursuivre des \u00e9tudes et de retrouver des membres de leurs familles dans des pays tiers.\n\n\n58. M\u00eame si quelquefois les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s trouvent par leurs propres moyens des voies\ncompl\u00e9mentaires, les processus y relatifs peuvent n\u00e9cessiter la facilitation de mesures\nadministratives, compl\u00e9t\u00e9es par des garanties de protection. \u00c0 cet effet, le HCR a contribu\u00e9\n\u00e0 soutenir la mise en place et l\u2019\u00e9largissement des voies compl\u00e9mentaires, notamment en\nArgentine, au Br\u00e9sil, au Chili, en Colombie, en France, au Japon et au P\u00e9rou, aux c\u00f4t\u00e9s\nd\u2019autres \u00c9tats de la r\u00e9gion du MERCOSUR. Un nouveau partenariat a \u00e9t\u00e9 nou\u00e9 avec\n_United World Colleges_ pour \u00e9tendre l\u2019enseignement secondaire aux \u00e9l\u00e8ves r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans\ndes pays tiers. Il a \u00e9t\u00e9 demand\u00e9 \u00e0 _Talent Beyond Boundaries_ de mettre en place une base de\ndonn\u00e9es sur les comp\u00e9tences des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s en Jordanie et au Liban, afin de faciliter la\nmobilit\u00e9 de la main-d\u2019\u0153uvre vers des pays tiers. Le HCR et l\u2019OCDE ont entam\u00e9\nl\u2019inventaire des visas d\u2019entr\u00e9e \u00e0 caract\u00e8re non humanitaire, utilis\u00e9s par les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s dans les\npays de l\u2019OCDE, en vue de contribuer \u00e0 la mise au point des orientations sur les voies\ncompl\u00e9mentaires. L\u2019Organisation a aussi soutenu l\u2019adoption du Protocole de l\u2019Union\nafricaine sur la libre circulation des personnes et le droit de r\u00e9sidence et d\u2019\u00e9tablissement,\nqui facilitera l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e0 d\u2019autres voies d\u2019admission.\n\n\n59. Malgr\u00e9 les progr\u00e8s accomplis, les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s continuent de rencontrer des obstacles et\ndes d\u00e9fis dans l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux voies compl\u00e9mentaires, dont l\u2019impossibilit\u00e9 d\u2019obtenir\nl\u2019autorisation de sortie, le visa d\u2019entr\u00e9e et les documents de voyage. Les autres d\u00e9fis\ncomprennent l\u2019absence de garanties appropri\u00e9es de protection et le caract\u00e8re strict des\ncrit\u00e8res d\u2019\u00e9ligibilit\u00e9. Le HCR continue \u00e0 aider les \u00c9tats et d\u2019autres parties prenantes \u00e0\ncontourner ces obstacles et \u00e0 fournir des orientations et des conseils techniques sur la mise\nau point des voies compl\u00e9mentaires pr\u00e9visibles, durables et favorables \u00e0 la protection.\n\n#### **VII. Conclusion**\n\n\n60. Aujourd\u2019hui, la communaut\u00e9 internationale est \u00e0 la crois\u00e9e des chemins, avec un\ncertain nombre d\u2019avanc\u00e9es prometteuses dans le contexte de l\u2019\u00e9laboration du Pacte mondial\nsur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Ce Pacte peut mobiliser la communaut\u00e9 internationale au soutien d\u2019un\nagenda partag\u00e9, fond\u00e9 sur les principes fondamentaux d\u2019humanit\u00e9 et de solidarit\u00e9, pouvant\napporter un r\u00e9el changement dans la vie, tant des r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s que des pays et communaut\u00e9s\nd\u2019accueil. Le HCR entend travailler \u00e9troitement avec les \u00c9tats et divers partenaires pour\nfaire en sorte que le Pacte mondial sur les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9es puisse voir le jour, gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 des actions\nconcr\u00e8tes sur le terrain.\n\n\n\n**A/AC.96/1178**\n\n\n**18**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/95c406c1-52f5-30de-8be1-1b319e6c9923/5b7ea114a.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_123/raw/doc_123_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,162 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "With an education, everyone has an equal\nand fair chance to make it in life. But I believe\neducation is not only about the syllabus. It is\nabout friendship and also a place to discover our\ntalents and allow us to discover our destiny.\n\n\nMary Maker,\nSouth Sudanese refugee, speaks at TEDxKakumaCamp,\nheld at Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Empower Refugee Youth**\nYouth Education Programme\n###### 1\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s pioneering\n\nYOUTH EDUCATION PROGRAMME\n\nsets a new benchmark for initiatives\n\nseeking to ensure that more refugee youth\n\nhave access to quality post-primary\neducation. It is an investment in the\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 2\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\n\nCurrently being piloted in Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda and Uganda between 2017 and\n\n2021, **the Youth Education Programme will work with over 232,000 refugee**\n\n**youth.** The global needs of youth dwarfs this number, and the programme aims to\n\nbuild on evidence from this first step, opening up further educational and economic\n\nopportunities on a wider scale.\n\n\n\nThe **Global Refugee Youth Consultations** in\n**22 countries,** organised by UNHCR and the\nWomen\u2019s Refugee Commission in 2015 and 2016 [1],\nbrought a request from refugee youth for UNHCR\nand partners to ensure that young refugees are\ngiven opportunities to shape their own futures,\nand develop the skills they need during displacement and beyond. The importance of post-primary\neducation is expressed throughout the Seven Core\nActions for Refugee Youth emerging from the Global\nRefugee Youth Consultations, including addressing\nthe need to empower youth through meaningful\nengagement, as well as to recognise, utilise, and\ndevelop youth capacities and skills.\n\n\n\nThe Youth Education Programme responds to these\nseven core actions with **innovative approaches**,\nincluding the use of technology, specific capacity\nand skills development, and youth-centred community-based models of engagement. The programme\nprioritises education and training for **youth empow-**\n**erment and self-reliance**, and improves access\nto **inclusive high-quality learning opportunities**\nthrough secondary and higher education, skills\ndevelopment, and vocational training. Mentoring,\nsocial network promotion, and peer-to-peer support\nare important elements of the programme.\n\n\nThe Youth Education Programme works with\nrefugee youth who are in school, as well as those\nwho are out of school.\n\n\n\n**Global Refugee Youth Consultations:**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Empower Refugee Youth**\nYouth Education Programme\n###### 3\n\n\nThe Youth Education Programme responds to the demands by refugee youth\nfor more education and skills training opportunities. There is a growing recognition by governments that sustainable development requires greater investment in\npost-primary education for both refugee and host-community youth.\n\n\nExpanding education and training for young people is central to the New York\nDeclaration and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework, aligned with\nthe aims of Sustainable Development Goal 4.\n\n\n\nREFUGEE\nYOUTH EDUCATION\n\n\n**AN IMPERATIVE FOR RESILIENCE**\nEducational institutions offer refugee youth\na place of safety during displacement.\nEducation is an investment in the future, nurturing and developing the leaders, teachers,\npeace-builders, scientists, architects, engineers,\n\n\n\ncivil servants, health workers, and home makers\nwho will rebuild and revitalise their countries.\nEducating refugee youth is central to the peaceful\nand sustainable development of the countries\nwhere they reside, as well as the countries they will\nreturn or move to.\n\n\n**Refugee youth are dynamic and resourceful**\n**people, who possess the potential to create**\n**change in their communities.** More than half of\nthe 20 million refugees under UNHCR\u2019s mandate\nare aged under 18. In some places, this figure is\neven higher. In Kakuma camp in Kenya, 75% of\nrefugees are under 25. In spite of this, official policies and development programmes often overlook\nthe needs, experiences, and potential of young\nrefugees. Too many youth have little or no access\nto education, employment, or social opportunities.\nThey grow into adulthood in conditions of displacement and insecurity, which can result in them\nremaining marginalized and highly vulnerable.\n\n\nUNTAPPED POTENTIAL [2]\n\nIn some places, secondary schools do not\nexist, and where they do, they are often\ninaccessible to refugees, especially girls.\nA refugee child is 5 times more likely to be out of\nschool than other children. [3] Young refugees face\npressure to find work, get married quickly, and fulfill\nhousehold duties. Just 1% of them make it through\nto tertiary education.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 4\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\n\n**Figure 1.** Refugee enrolment\n\n\n\nTertiary Refugees\nTertiary Global\nSecondary Refugees, Low-Income Countries\nSecondary Refugees\nSecondary Global\n\n\n\n1\n\n37\n\n11\n\n23\n\n84\n\n\n\nEnroled in school, in %   Untapped potential, in %\n\n\n\n**Secondary education services for refugees are**\n**hard to access.** Refugee youth are often excluded\nfrom national education systems, or face limitations to their freedom of movement, preventing\nthem from accessing schools which are located\nat a distance from their homes. In most refugee\nareas there are frequently fewer, if any, secondary\nschools. Refugees often miss out on school for long\nperiods due to conflict and flight, making it difficult for them to enrol in school without extra help,\nwhich is seldom available. Refugees may need to\nlearn a new language to be able to attend school.\nThe host country may not accept exam certificates\nfrom the home country, or may not allow children\nwithout birth certificates or identity papers to enrol.\nCost also poses a barrier. Per student, secondary\nschooling costs more than primary, as secondary\nschools are more complex to manage, staff are\nmore specialized, and facilities and teaching\nmaterials cost more. Refugees commonly face\nrestrictions to their right to work in the host country,\nso often parents cannot get jobs to earn money to\npay for their children\u2019s education.\n\n\n**Tertiary education is almost out of reach,** with\n99% of refugees excluded from university and other\nforms of tertiary education. Low levels of secondary\neducation completion diminish tertiary education\npossibilities. However, even if refugees are able to\n\n\n\ncomplete secondary schooling, the cost of higher\neducation is a major barrier, increased by the need\nin most cases to live away from home.\n\n\n**There are few opportunities for skills training,**\nwith insufficient access to formal and non-formal\nskills training programmes for refugee youth, either\nwithin formal schooling, or for those who are out\nof school. As a result, refugee youth often find\nthemselves without the relevant skills and opportunities for gainful employment. Those who have not\naccessed or completed school also lack clear pathways and support to move on to recognized and\naccredited professional training programmes, which\ncould lead to safer and more stable livelihoods.\nRefugees often face policy barriers to finding stable\nemployment, which discourages their pursuit of\neducation and training.\n\n\n**Girls in particular struggle to enrol in and**\n**complete post-primary education.** Added to the\ndifficulties of arriving in a new country, and possibly\nhaving to learn a new language, refugee girls face\nadditional barriers. Living in isolated and remote\nlocations creates obstacles for girls to access and\nstay in school, due to distance, insecure routes,\nand lack of safe transport. Common barriers that\nrefugee girls share with girls from host communities\nare poor sanitation and hygiene facilities, as well\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "as a lack of female teachers in schools, especially\nwhere this is culturally appropriate. As they get\nolder, refugee girls face more marginalization, and\nthe gender gap grows wider. In some societies, for\ncultural reasons that are often exacerbated by the\nnew environment and the family\u2019s efforts to keep\ntheir female members out of harm\u2019s way, girls\u2019\neducation is not prioritised. Schools often fail to\nadequately address the sexual and gender-based\nviolence to which girls are exposed. Many families therefore keep their girls at home for domestic\nduties, or seek to arrange early marriages for them.\n\n\nSustainable Development Agenda\n\n\n\n**Empower Refugee Youth**\nYouth Education Programme\n###### 5\n\n\n**A GLOBAL CHALLENGE**\n\n**Globally, in spite of international commitments,**\n**200 million young people between 12 and 17**\n**years old are not in school.** Poverty is a major\ncause. Most live in Sub-Saharan Africa, North\nAfrica, the Middle East, and Southern Asia. [4]\nAlthough refugees have additional challenges to\novercome, as result of their experiences in conflict\nareas, arriving in a foreign country, and sometimes\nmissing out on several years of education, all young\npeople from poor families in low-income countries\nfind it hard to complete their education and earn a\nliving. To achieve inclusive and sustainable development for all, we need to address these issues\ntogether with the communities hosting refugees.\n\n\n\nThe SDG\u2019s promise to leave no one behind. SDG4 states that refugees should be\nincluded in efforts to achieve education goals. Policymakers, as well as humanitarian\nand development professionals, have become increasingly aware that very high\nnumbers of refugee youth are not in education, training, or employment.\n\n\n**THE YOUTH EDUCATION PROGRAMME WILL CONTRIBUTE TO:**\n\n\n**SDG Target 4.4:** to give more youth and adults the skills they need, including\ntechnical and vocational skills, to find jobs or become entrepreneurs.\n\n\n**SDG Target 4.7** : to promote the skills needed for sustainable development,\nincluding understanding human rights, gender equality, global citizenship, and\nvalues of peace and non-violence.\n\n\n**SDG Target 8.6:** to \u2018substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in\nemployment, education or training\u2019 by 2020.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 6\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\n\nPROGRAMME COMPONENTS\n\n\n**SECONDARY EDUCATION**\n\n\nSecondary school is an important\nstepping-stone towards lifelong learning. It\nopens the door to tertiary education, skills training,\nand employment opportunities. It provides a safe\nspace for youth who are at risk from child labour,\nsexual and other forms of exploitation, recruitment\nby armed groups, early marriage and pregnancy,\nor negative coping behaviours. Girls\u2019 access to\nsecondary education is particularly important.\nWhen a refugee girl receives secondary education, her family and community are more likely to\nimprove their social and economic status, as well\nas their health. [5] Secondary school graduates, both\nboys and girls, are more likely to find jobs that can\nprovide a sustainable income for their families.\n\n\n**Together we aim to:**\n\n- [\u0007Help strengthen the capacity of governments ]\nand other partners to **include refugee youth in**\n**national secondary schools.**\n\n\n- [\u0007Assist local authorities to ] **[build additional ]**\n**school facilities,** including classrooms,\nsanitation, and hygiene facilities\n\n\n- **[Provide financial support]** [ to enable refugee ]\nyouth to attend national secondary schools.\n\n\n- [\u0007Assist schools to ] **[expand use of information ]**\n**and communications technologies (ICT) and**\n**school laboratories** and install solar panels to\nprovide power and connectivity.\n\n\n- **[Promote]** [ the professional development of ]\nteachers and use ICT to improve teaching quality.\n\n\n\n\n- **[Support accelerated education programmes]**\nthat allow refugee youth who have missed out on\nschool to catch up on their studies and transition\nto the formal secondary education system and/or\nskills development opportunities.\n\n\n- **[Encourage the setting up and training of ]**\n**school management committees,** including\nrefugee teachers, parents, and students\n\n\n**EDUCATION FOR GIRLS**\n\n\nGirls face additional barriers to education for\nvarious reasons, including social and cultural conventions, and family expectations. Refugee girls\nwho cannot attend school are more vulnerable to\nsexual exploitation, domestic labour, early marriage, pregnancy, and exploitative and dangerous\nforms of employment. Ensuring that refugee girls\ncan access education is therefore central to their\nempowerment, and to the prosperity and increased\nresilience of their families and communities. The\nnumber of child deaths from pneumonia, diarrhoea,\nand malaria would fall by 49% if all girls finished\nsecondary school. [6] Similarly, child marriages would\nfall by 64% if all girls finish secondary school. [7]\nUNHCR\u2019s report, _Her Turn_, highlights that helping\nrefugee girls to obtain a good education requires\ncoordinated action among all stakeholders \u2013 from\nEducation Ministries and teacher training institutions, to communities and local schools, to donors,\ninternational organisations, and the private sector. [8]\n\n\n**Together we aim to:**\n\n- **[\u0007Provide cash support to families]** [, to increase ]\ngirls\u2019 enrolment in secondary school, in\nhigher education institutions, and in technical and vocational education and training\n(TVET) programmes.\n\n\n- **[Raise awareness]** [ of the importance of ]\npost-primary education for girls, and the\nopportunities that are available.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "- **[\u0007Provide school materials]** [, solar lamps, and ]\nother forms of support that help girls to pursue\ntheir studies at all levels.\n\n\n- [\u0007Provide ] **[school transport]** [ and build ] **[appropriate ]**\n**and safe infrastructure.**\n\n\n- **[\u0007Support extra-curricular classes]** [9] **[, ]**\n**peer-to-peer support**, and mentoring for\nrefugee girls in secondary education.\n\n\n- **[Increase the number of qualified ]**\n**female teachers** in secondary schools by\nhelping female students to obtain certified\nteaching qualifications.\n\n\n**TERTIARY EDUCATION**\n\n\nThe demand for access to tertiary education\n\n\n\n**Empower Refugee Youth**\nYouth Education Programme\n###### 7\n\n\n**Together we aim to:**\n\n- [\u0007Help more refugees to attend higher education ]\ninstitutions through expanded **partnerships**\n**with higher education institutions** in order to\nincrease scholarship quotas for refugees.\n\n\n- [\u0007Provide financial support to ] **[scholarship ]**\n**programmes** that enable refugee youth to enrol\nin tertiary education.\n\n\n- [\u0007Provide] **[ intensive language programmes]** [ to ]\nhelp refugee students pursue their studies in\ncountries of asylum.\n\n\n- [\u0007Set-up and expand] **[ higher education ]**\n**connected learning programmes** to reach\nmore students.\n\n\n- [\u0007Build ] **[partnerships with the private ]**\n**sector** to improve and expand access to\nconnected learning.\n\n\n- **[\u0007Assist refugees to access bridging ]**\n**programmes** [10], to help them learn content they\nhave missed, or support knowledge and skill\nacquisition, in order to transition successfully\nfrom secondary to tertiary education.\n\n\n- [\u0007Train ICT facilitators and upgrade ]\n**ICT infrastructure** .\n\n\n- [\u0007Provide laboratories with ] **[IT equipment and ]**\n**materials** and improve access to electricity and\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 8\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\n\n**SKILLS FOR LIFE AND WORK**\n\n\nTo obtain jobs and entrepreneurial skills, youth need\naccess to both formal and non-formal flexible educational opportunities, and technical and vocational\ntraining. Refugee youth who have only completed\nprimary or lower secondary school need help to\nobtain qualifications, so that they can transition to\nhigher levels of education and increase personal\ndevelopment. Youth training programmes need to\nteach practical and technical skills, as well as interpersonal, social, and civic skills, that enable youth\nto problem-solve and develop positive values. A\ncomprehensive approach will help students to join\nthe economy, participate in their communities, and\nmake informed decisions. In an increasingly digital\nworld, they also need digital literacy.\n\n\n**Together we aim to:**\n\n- \u0007 **[Increase the number of secondary schools]**\nthat combine technical skills training with\nformal secondary education, and provide\nentrepreneurship training and internships.\n\n\n- \u0007 [Encourage and incentivise national TVET ]\ninstitutes, in partnership with humanitarian,\ndevelopment, and private sector actors, to\n**include refugees in TVET programmes.**\n\n\n- \u0007 [Construct and upgrade ] **[youth development ]**\n**centres,** to provide electricity, internet\nconnectivity, and ICT equipment.\n\n\n\n\n- \u0007 **[Support language, literacy and numeracy ]**\n**classes, business and entrepreneur-**\n**ship courses, ICT and connected**\n**learning programmes, and counselling**\nfor out-of-school youth.\n\n\n- \u0007 **[Offer change maker grants]** [ that give refugee ]\nyouth an opportunity to lead and learn by\ndeveloping their own activities and solutions.\n\n\n**YOUTH**\n**EDUCATION RESEARCH**\n\n\nThe Youth Education Programme also seeks to\nimprove the relevance, protection, and sustainability\nof youth education and training programmes that\nUNHCR and its partners provide. The importance of\npost-primary education for young refugees emerges\nclearly in the core recommendations of the Global\nRefugee Youth Consultations. However, research in\neducation in emergencies is generally limited, and\nthis is particularly the case in the area of refugee\nyouth education.\n\n\nThe Youth Education Programme also seeks to\nimprove the relevance, protection, and sustainability\nof youth education and training programmes that\nUNHCR and its partners provide. The importance of\npost-primary education for young refugees emerges\nclearly in the core recommendations of the Global\nRefugee Youth Consultations. However, research in\neducation in emergencies is generally limited, and\nthis is particularly the case in the area of refugee\nyouth education.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 10\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\n\nOUR APPROACH\n\n\n**Promote national inclusion**\nWe are strengthening our partnerships\nwith host governments and development\npartners to enhance the capacity of secondary\neducation services to benefit youth from both\nrefugee and host communities. We promote the\ninclusion of refugees in national educational planning, budgeting and monitoring, through close\ncollaboration with education partners, and participation in Local Education Groups and other national\nprocesses. We advocate for policies that permit\nrefugees to enrol in education, including tertiary\neducation, under the same conditions as nationals.\n\n\n**Support teachers to raise**\n**the quality of education**\n\nWe work with national partners to improve the\nquality of teacher training and professional development, including through the use of ICT. We\nsupport the strengthening of teacher management\n(including pay and conditions, accommodation, and\ntransport), both for national and refugee teachers.\n\n\n**Harness innovative approaches**\n\nWe promote innovation by supporting refugee\nyouth to drive programme design. We do this by\nexploring, together with youth and partners, how to\nreduce the educational barriers that refugee youth\nface in specific contexts, and build on successful\ninitiatives such as the TIGER girls programme in\nJordan [11], Teachers-for-Teachers, and connected\nlearning programmes.\n\n\n**Strengthen youth engagement**\n\nWe consult with refugee youth to ensure that\nprogrammatic approaches meet their needs, and\nto develop more youth-led initiatives. We provide\nmore leadership opportunities that assist young\nrefugees to be ambassadors in their communities, participate in decision-making bodies, and\nact as local or national spokespersons or advocates. We strengthen mentoring, social networks,\n\n\n\nand peer-to-peer support for refugee and host\ncommunity youth. We work with UNHCR\u2019s Global\nYouth Advisory Council, which is composed of\n15 refugee youth (including representatives from\nKenya, Pakistan and Uganda) [12], and the Council\nliaises with national refugee youth organizations,\nto ensure that the needs and aspirations of young\nrefugees are met.\n\n\n**Build and strengthen partnerships**\n\nWe are strengthening our partnerships with host\ngovernments, communities, schools and teachers,\nTVET and higher education institutions, the private sector, and development actors. Together,\nwe promote an enabling environment for refugee\nyouth, and improve the quality of learning, training,\nand support that is available to youth in refugee\nand host communities, who are prevented by\npoverty, remoteness, or structural disadvantages\nfrom completing their education or professional\ntraining. Working closely with private sector partners, we are increasing the provision of internships\nand traineeships, and multiplying digital solutions\nand online learning opportunities. With our partners, we are expanding opportunities to train in\nbusiness skills, providing mentoring for start-ups,\nand financially assisting youth development centres and TVET institutions to improve their facilities\nand equipment.\n\n\n\u0007PROGRAMME\nCOUNTRIES [13]\n\nTogether with partners, and in collaboration\nwith national authorities and education institutions, UNHCR teams in Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda\nand Uganda are already implementing education\nprogrammes. Although the four countries have\nhosted a large number of refugees for many years,\nappropriate support for quality secondary and\npost-secondary education and training for refugees\nhas been insufficient to meet needs and demand.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Empower Refugee Youth**\nYouth Education Programme\n###### 11\n\n\n\nthe Youth Education Programme, 2017 - 2021\n\n\n\nUganda\n\nPakistan\n\nRwanda\n\nKenya\n\n**TOTAL**\n\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n63665\n\n86135\n53902\n2800\n\n**231702**\n50000 100000 150000 200000 250000\n\n\n\nIn all four countries, refugees have the right to\naccess the national education system. However,\nenrolment rates of refugees between the ages of\n12 and 17 have been extremely low. In Pakistan, for\nexample, only 5% of this age group are in school.\nIn Uganda, about the figure is 6%. In Uganda, there\nare only five girls for every ten boys enrolled in\nsecondary education, while in Kenya, there are only\nfour girls for every ten boys enrolled.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s programmes offer tertiary education\nscholarships for refugees in all four countries. In\nKenya, a connected learning approach has also\nbeen underway for some years. In Rwanda and\nKenya, opportunities for TVET, work skills training,\nand non-formal education need to be increased,\nto meet the demand among refugee and host\ncommunity youth.\n\n\n\nChallenges of access, availability, quality, cost,\nand other key factors standing in the way of education for refugee youth, need more attention and\na focused effort. The Youth Education Programme\nbuilds on existing activities in the four countries,\nscaling these and expanding into new activities, in close collaboration with refugee youth,\nthe governments, and other partners. The Youth\nEducation Programme is intended to gradually\nexpand to other refugee hosting countries, in order\nto strengthen and grow programming that will help\nreduce the gap in refugee youth education.\n\n\nEXPECTED RESULTS [14]\n\n\n**We aim to:**\n1. \u0007 [Increase the number of refugee youth, including ]\ngirls, who enrol, remain in, and complete their\n**secondary education** in national schools.\n\n\n2. [ \u0007Increase the number of refugee youth, including ]\nwomen, who enrol in, and complete, **tertiary**\n**education programmes.**\n\n\n3. \u0007 [Increase the number of refugee youth who are ]\nequipped with **life and work skills** .\n\n\n4. \u0007 [Improve the] **[ policy environment]** [ for refugee ]\nyouth, addressing their access to secondary and\ntertiary education, as well as skills training.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### 12\n\n\n\nEMPOWER\nREFUGEE\n\n\nENDNOTES\n\n\n[1 UNHCR. 2016. We Believe in Youth. Global Refugee Youth Consultations, Final Report.](http://www.unhcr.org/57e1126e7.html)\n\n\n[2 UNHCR. 2017. Left Behind. Refugee Education in Crisis.](http://www.unhcr.org/left-behind/)\n\n\n[3 UNHCR.2016. Missing out. Refugee Education in Crisis.](http://www.unhcr.org/57d9d01d0)\n\n\n[4 \u0007UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). 2018. Fact Sheet No. 48. One in Five Children, Adolescents](http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/fs48-one-five-children-adolescents-youth-out-school-2018-en.pdf)\n[and Youth is Out of School.](http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/fs48-one-five-children-adolescents-youth-out-school-2018-en.pdf)\n\n\n[5 UNHCR. 2018. Her Turn. It is time to make refugee girls\u2018 education a priority.](http://www.unhcr.org/herturn/)\n\n\n[6 UNESCO. 2013. Education Transforms Lives.](http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002231/223115e.pdf)\n\n\n[7 UNESCO. 2014. Global Education Monitoring Report.](http://www.unesco.org/new/en/brasilia/about-this-office/single-view/news/womens_education_helps_avert_child_marriage/)\n\n\n[8 UNHCR. 2018. Her Turn. It is time to make refugee girls\u2018 education a priority.](http://www.unhcr.org/herturn/)\n\n\n9 \u0007Remedial programmes provide additional support, concurrent with regular classes, to students\nwho require some short-term help with content or skills in order to succeed in regular classes.\n[Source: Accelerated Education Working Group. October 2017. Guide to the Accelerated Education](https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/sites/default/files/documents/335._aewg_accelerated_education_guide_to_the_principles-screen.pdf)\n[Principles, p. 10.](https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/sites/default/files/documents/335._aewg_accelerated_education_guide_to_the_principles-screen.pdf)\n\n\n10 \u0007A bridging programme is a short-term targeted preparation course that assists students to make\nthe transition from their home to their host education system and curriculum, or to prepare for entry\ninto a different type of certified education. It builds on the student\u2019s previous success, for example\n[in language acquisition. Source: Accelerated Education Working Group. October 2017. Guide to the](https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/sites/default/files/documents/335._aewg_accelerated_education_guide_to_the_principles-screen.pdf)\n[Accelerated Education Principles, p. 10.](https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/sites/default/files/documents/335._aewg_accelerated_education_guide_to_the_principles-screen.pdf)\n\n\n11 \u0007\u2018TIGER\u2019 (These Inspiring Girls Enjoy Reading) is a community-based programme developed in\nthe Zaatari camp in Jordan which motivates Syrian adolescent girls to return to or remain in\nschool. Adolescent girls have access to books and digital content in Arabic and English through\na multi-media open-source library that uses tablets. The programme is supported by Open\nLearning Exchange.\n\n\n[12 \u0007UNHCR. Global Youth Advisory Council\u2019s recommendations to the Programme of Action of the](http://crrf.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/118)\n[Global Compact on Refugees. January 2018.](http://crrf.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/118)\n\n\n13 \u0007UNHCR intends to expand and scale the Youth Education Programme globally to address the needs\nin other refugee host countries.\n\n\n14 \u0007The numbers in the graph are estimates. The programme will invest in national structures and\naims to include refugee youth in national education programmes. It is estimated that an additional\n438,000 young people in the four countries could indirectly benefit from the programme.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Education is a way to help young people heal, but it\nis also the way to revive entire countries. Allowed\nto learn, grow and flourish, children will grow up\nto contribute both to the societies, that host them,\nand to their homelands when peace allows them\nto return. That is why education is one of the most\nimportant ways to solve the world\u2019s crises.\n\n\nFilippo Grandi,\nUN High Commissioner for Refugees\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "YOUTH EDUCATION PROGRAMME\n\n\nYouth are dynamic and resourceful, with hopes,\n\ndreams, ambitions, and huge potential.\n\nInvesting in the Youth Education Programme gives\n\nrefugee youth the opportunity to access\n\neducation and skills for life and work, enabling these\n\nyoung people to contribute positively to their\n\ncommunities, their countries, and most importantly,\n\ntheir own futures.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d4f52aea-92a4-3c75-8912-deca9f700f5d/5baa3b984.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_124/raw/doc_124_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,92 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS**\n## **GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR**\n\n_Refugiados de Burundi y miembros de la comunidad local de acogida de Ruanda estudian uno al_\n_lado del otro en la escuela Paysannat en el este de Ruanda. \u00a9 ACNUR / Hannah Maule-ffinch_\n\n\n**\u00cdNDICE**\n\n\n**\u00bfQu\u00e9 es el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados? \u00bfPor qu\u00e9 lo necesitamos?** **2**\n\n\n**\u00bfC\u00f3mo se desarroll\u00f3 el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados?** **3**\n\n\n**\u00bfC\u00f3mo funcionar\u00e1 el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados?** **5**\n\n\n**\u00bfQu\u00e9 contiene el Pacto Mundial sobre refugiados? \u00bfQu\u00e9 hay de nuevo en el Pacto?** **6**\n\n\n**\u00bfA partir de aqu\u00ed hacia d\u00f3nde vamos?** **9**\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n#### **\u00bfQu\u00e9 es el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados? \u00bfPor qu\u00e9 lo necesitamos?**\n\n\n\nAl final del 2017, hab\u00eda cerca de **25.4 millones de personas refugiadas** alrededor del mundo [1], de las\ncuales m\u00e1s de la mitad son menores de 18 a\u00f1os de edad. Adem\u00e1s, la carga y la responsabilidad de\nacoger y apoyar a un n\u00famero tan grande de personas refugiadas, sigue recayendo\ndesproporcionadamente en un n\u00famero relativamente peque\u00f1o de pa\u00edses. Hoy, solamente diez pa\u00edses\nacogen el 60% de las personas refugiadas del mundo. Solo Turqu\u00eda acoge a **3,5 millones de**\n**personas refugiadas**, m\u00e1s que cualquier otro pa\u00eds. En L\u00edbano, **una de cada seis personas** es\nrefugiada; en Jordania, una de cada catorce. Adem\u00e1s, la gran mayor\u00eda de las personas refugiadas del\nmundo ( **85%** ) vive en pa\u00edses en desarrollo que enfrentan sus propios desaf\u00edos econ\u00f3micos y de\ndesarrollo.\n\npersonas refugiadas, incluso a trav\u00e9s de niveles sin\nprecedentes de financiamiento humanitario y\naceptando personas refugiadas para el\nreasentamiento. Sin embargo, su n\u00famero es\nlimitado: diez donantes gubernamentales (incluida la\nUni\u00f3n Europea) proporcionan casi el ochenta por\n\nde los dos tercios de las solicitudes de\n\npa\u00edses. A pesar de la generosidad de estos Estados,\n\ny cada vez mayor.\nCon la adopci\u00f3n de la _**Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York para los Refugiados y los Migrantes**_ en\nseptiembre de 2016 [2], los Estados Miembros de las Naciones Unidas adoptaron una serie de\ncompromisos para mejorar la forma en que la comunidad internacional aborda las cuestiones de\nmovilidad humana. En relaci\u00f3n con los refugiados, esto incluy\u00f3 dos pasos clave hacia un sistema\nm\u00e1s sostenible para proporcionar protecci\u00f3n a las personas refugiadas y responder a las\nnecesidades de los pa\u00edses y las comunidades de acogida:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n     - Primero, los Estados Miembros adoptaron el **Marco de Respuesta Integral para los Refugiados**\n\n        - \u2018 **CRRF** \u2019 (por sus siglas en ingl\u00e9s), que se basa en d\u00e9cadas de experiencia en la protecci\u00f3n de\nlas personas refugiadas, en el apoyo a los pa\u00edses de acogida y las comunidades, as\u00ed como en la\nb\u00fasqueda de soluciones [3] . Este marco establece una amplia gama de medidas que debe tomar la\ncomunidad internacional en respuesta a una situaci\u00f3n de refugiados a gran escala en todo el ciclo\nde desplazamiento, desde la admisi\u00f3n y la recepci\u00f3n hasta la satisfacci\u00f3n de las necesidades del\nmomento y la b\u00fasqueda de soluciones.\n\n     - Segundo, los Estados Miembros acordaron continuar mejorando las respuestas internacionales\ntrabajando en la adopci\u00f3n de un ' **Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados** ' en 2018. Con este fin,\nsolicitaron al Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) que\nconsulte con los Estados Miembros y una amplia gama de otras partes interesadas y propongan\neste pacto [4] [. La propuesta del Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados (disponible en ingl\u00e9s)](http://www.unhcr.org/5b51fd587) de la cual el\n\n\n1 Incluidas las personas refugiadas palestinas registradas por la Agencia de la ONU para los Refugiados Palestinos (UNRWA, por\nsus siglas en ingl\u00e9s).\n[2 Para m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n sobre la Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York, visite: http://www.acnur.org/declaracion-de-nueva-york-sobre-](http://www.acnur.org/declaracion-de-nueva-york-sobre-refugiados-y-migrantes.html)\n[refugiados-y-migrantes.html.](http://www.acnur.org/declaracion-de-nueva-york-sobre-refugiados-y-migrantes.html)\n[3 Ver http://www.acnur.org/marco-de-respuesta-integral-para-los-refugiados.html.](http://www.acnur.org/marco-de-respuesta-integral-para-los-refugiados.html)\n4 Esto incluye las organizaciones internacionales dentro y fuera del Sistema de las Naciones Unidas, los actores del desarrollo y\nlas instituciones financieras internacionales, las organizaciones regionales, la sociedad civil, (incluidas las organizaciones\n\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\nCRRF forma parte integral, fue lanzada el 20 de julio de 2018.\n\n\nA menos de dos a\u00f1os de la adopci\u00f3n del CRRF, ya se puede observar un **avance significativo**, que\nincluye:\n\n\n      - Un mejor apoyo para los pa\u00edses y comunidades que acogen a un gran n\u00famero de personas\nrefugiadas, incluidos 2 mil millones de d\u00f3lares estadounidenses de apoyo al desarrollo\nespec\u00edfico del Banco Mundial y m\u00e1s de mil millones de d\u00f3lares estadounidenses de apoyo de\ndonantes bilaterales del desarrollo a pa\u00edses particularmente afectados por el desplazamiento\nde refugiados;\n\n\n_Refugiados Rohingya ingresan a Bangladesh en octubre 2017. \u00a9 ACNUR / Roger Arnold_\n\n\n      - Nuevas iniciativas para ampliar y salvaguardar el acceso de las personas refugiadas a la\neducaci\u00f3n, a los medios de vida y a los sistemas nacionales de justicia; y\n\n\n      - Redoblar esfuerzos para encontrar soluciones, incluso mediante el aumento de un grupo de\npa\u00edses de reasentamiento, el incremento de programas de patrocinio privado y comunitario, y\nun mayor \u00e9nfasis en las condiciones en los pa\u00edses de origen que permitan el retorno en\ncondiciones de seguridad y dignidad.\n\n\nM\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n sobre los avances se encuentra disponible en ingl\u00e9s en: _[From commitment to action:](http://www.unhcr.org/events/conferences/5b8d1ad34/commitment-action-highlights-progress-towards-comprehensive-refugee-responses.html)_\n_[Highlights of progress](http://www.unhcr.org/events/conferences/5b8d1ad34/commitment-action-highlights-progress-towards-comprehensive-refugee-responses.html)_ _[towards comprehensive refugee responses since the adoption of the New York](http://www.unhcr.org/5b6d4aa37)_\n_[Declaration](http://www.unhcr.org/5b6d4aa37)_ / Del compromiso a la acci\u00f3n: aspectos principales del progreso alcanzado hacia las\nrespuestas integrales de los refugiados desde la adopci\u00f3n de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York).\n### **\u00bfC\u00f3mo se desarroll\u00f3 el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados?**\n\n\nTal como lo solicit\u00f3 la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, el Pacto Mundial se ha desarrollado\na trav\u00e9s de un amplio proceso de consulta multilateral con los Estados Miembros y otras partes\ninteresadas clave. El proceso incluy\u00f3:\n\n\n     - La **[aplicaci\u00f3n pr\u00e1ctica del CRRF](http://www.acnur.org/marco-de-respuesta-integral-para-los-refugiados.html)** en m\u00e1s de una docena de pa\u00edses, y a nivel regional en dos\n\nconfesionales, el mundo acad\u00e9mico y otros expertos), el sector privado, los miembros de las comunidades de acogida y los propios\nrefugiados.\n\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\nsituaciones, junto con un proceso de recopilaci\u00f3n de buenas pr\u00e1cticas y lecciones aprendidas de\nuna amplia gama de situaciones de refugiados \u2014en el pasado y en el presente\u2014 donde los\nprincipios del CRRF brindan contenido a las pol\u00edticas y los programas. Un elemento clave de este\nproceso fueron las **Consultas Anuales del ACNUR con las ONG** en 2017, que se destinaron a\nla aplicaci\u00f3n del CRRF y al desarrollo del Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados [5] ;\n\n     - Una serie de cinco **[discusiones tem\u00e1ticas](http://www.unhcr.org/thematic-discussions-for-the-global-compact-on-refugees.html)** sobre temas clave para ser abordados por el Pacto\nMundial sobre Refugiados en la segunda mitad del 2017, incluyendo la participaci\u00f3n de los\nEstados, organizaciones regionales e internacionales, las ONG, representantes de la academia,\nexpertos, socios del sector privado, personas refugiadas (incluido el _Global Youth Advisory Council_\ndel ACNUR) y los representantes de las comunidades de acogida [6] ;\n\n\n     - El **[Di\u00e1logo del Alto Comisionado sobre los Desaf\u00edos de la Protecci\u00f3n](http://www.acnur.org/dialogo-del-alto-comisionado-sobre-los-desafios-de-proteccion-2017.html)** en diciembre de 2017,\nsirvi\u00f3 para hacer un balance sobre los avances realizados y las lecciones aprendidas en el curso\nde aplicaci\u00f3n pr\u00e1ctica del CRRF y las discusiones tem\u00e1ticas [7] ;\n\n     - Un proceso reiterativo de **seis consultas formales** con los Estados Miembros de las Naciones\nUnidas sobre los sucesivos borradores del Pacto Mundial de febrero a julio de 2018, consultas\nen las cuales se revis\u00f3 el texto, de acuerdo con la retroalimentaci\u00f3n recibida [8] ; y\n\n\n_El Di\u00e1logo del Alto Comisionado sobre los Desaf\u00edos de la Protecci\u00f3n en diciembre de 2017 sirvi\u00f3 para_\n\n_hacer un balance sobre los avances realizados en el desarrollo del Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados,_\n\n_antes de la publicaci\u00f3n del \"borrador cero\" en enero de 2018. \u00a9 ACNUR / Jean Marc Ferr\u00e9_\n\n\n     - La presentaci\u00f3n de casi **quinientas contribuciones por escrito disponibles p\u00fablicamente**\n\n\n[5 Ver http://www.acnur.org/marco-de-respuesta-integral-para-los-refugiados.html.](http://www.acnur.org/marco-de-respuesta-integral-para-los-refugiados.html)\n[6 Para m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n, incluidos documentos y grabaciones de video, ver http://www.unhcr.org/thematic-discussions-for-the-](http://www.unhcr.org/thematic-discussions-for-the-global-compact-on-refugees.html)\n[global-compact-on-refugees.html](http://www.unhcr.org/thematic-discussions-for-the-global-compact-on-refugees.html) (disponible en ingl\u00e9s).\n[7 Ver http://www.acnur.org/dialogo-del-alto-comisionado-sobre-los-desafios-de-proteccion-2017.html.](http://www.acnur.org/dialogo-del-alto-comisionado-sobre-los-desafios-de-proteccion-2017.html)\n[8 Ver www.unhcr.org/formalconsultations](http://www.unhcr.org/formalconsultations) (disponible en ingl\u00e9s).\n\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\n\nde una amplia gama de partes interesadas [9] .\n\n\n[Sobre la base de este proceso, el 20 de julio de 2018, el ACNUR public\u00f3 la propuesta del Pacto Mundial](http://www.unhcr.org/5b51fd587)\n[sobre Refugiados (disponible en ingl\u00e9s). El documento pretende ser pr\u00e1ctico e implementable, para](http://www.unhcr.org/5b51fd587)\nequilibrar las diversas opiniones \u2014y en ocasiones divergentes\u2014 y para construir sobre las \u00e1reas de\nconvergencia.\nAdem\u00e1s de este proceso, los Estados Miembros de las Naciones Unidas tambi\u00e9n han estado\ntrabajando en el desarrollo de un \u2018 **Pacto Mundial para una migraci\u00f3n segura, ordenada y regular** \u2019.\nEste Pacto, que tambi\u00e9n se deriva de la Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York, se desarroll\u00f3 a trav\u00e9s de un\nproceso intergubernamental bajo la cofacilitaci\u00f3n de los Representantes de las Misiones Permanentes\nde M\u00e9xico y de Suiza ante las Naciones Unidas en Nueva York. El Pacto se adoptar\u00e1 en una\nconferencia intergubernamental que se realizar\u00e1 en Marruecos en diciembre de 2018 [10] .\n### **\u00bfC\u00f3mo funcionar\u00e1 el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados?**\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados establece la arquitectura para una respuesta internacional m\u00e1s\ns\u00f3lida, m\u00e1s predecible y m\u00e1s equitativa a las grandes situaciones de refugiados. Aunque no es\njur\u00eddicamente vinculante, el Pacto orienta a la comunidad internacional en su conjunto para apoyar a\nlas personas refugiadas y a los pa\u00edses y comunidades que acogen grandes n\u00fameros \u2014incluso por\nper\u00edodos de tiempo prolongados\u2014 mediante la movilizaci\u00f3n de la voluntad pol\u00edtica, un apoyo m\u00e1s\namplio y la activaci\u00f3n de arreglos que buscan alcanzar una distribuci\u00f3n de la carga y responsabilidad\ncompartida m\u00e1s equitativa y predecible.\nHay una serie de caracter\u00edsticas clave del enfoque que el Pacto Mundial sobre los Refugiados\nincorpora.\nEn primer lugar, busca formas de brindar un **mayor apoyo a los pa\u00edses y comunidades de acogida**\nde manera que apoye la protecci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas y la b\u00fasqueda de soluciones\nduraderas; este apoyo incluye recursos financieros adicionales, pero tambi\u00e9n abarca respaldo pol\u00edtico,\nasistencia t\u00e9cnica, actividades de fortalecimiento institucional, acuerdos comerciales preferenciales,\nmayor acceso al reasentamiento y otras soluciones en terceros pa\u00edses, y los esfuerzos para abordar\nlas causas subyacentes y establecer condiciones en los pa\u00edses de origen que permitan a las personas\nrefugiadas regresar a sus hogares con seguridad y dignidad.\n\nUna parte importante de este apoyo se relaciona con **el nexo entre la acci\u00f3n humanitaria y el**\n**desarrollo** ; es decir, el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados buscar\u00e1 mejorar las respuestas humanitarias,\nal tiempo que proporcionar\u00e1 una base para la activaci\u00f3n temprana de la cooperaci\u00f3n al desarrollo para\nbrindar apoyo adicional con beneficios directos para las comunidades de acogida y las personas\nrefugiadas.\n\n\nEn segundo lugar, el Pacto Mundial **involucrar\u00e1 a una gama m\u00e1s amplia de Estados y otros socios**\nque est\u00e1n listos para responder a las grandes situaciones de refugiados, tanto nuevas como\nprolongadas. Abarcar\u00e1 un enfoque de \u2018m\u00faltiples partes interesadas\u2019, bajo el liderazgo nacional,\nmediante el fortalecimiento de las alianzas existentes y la creaci\u00f3n de otras nuevas. Las alianzas entre\nlos Estados, las organizaciones internacionales y regionales, las ONG y la comunidad acad\u00e9mica\nseguir\u00e1n siendo muy importantes, pero tambi\u00e9n hay un gran potencial para alianzas con instituciones\nfinancieras internacionales, el sector privado y muchos otros.\n\n\nEn tercer lugar, el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados buscar\u00e1 fomentar la **resiliencia y la**\n**autosuficiencia** de las personas refugiadas, \u2014de forma que tambi\u00e9n beneficie a las comunidades de\nacogida\u2014 facilitando el acceso a oportunidades de medios de vida y servicios y sistemas nacionales,\nrespaldados por el apoyo adecuado de la comunidad internacional. Para las personas refugiadas, esto\nsignifica que depender\u00e1n menos de la ayuda, estar\u00e1n en mejores condiciones para regresar a sus\n\n\n[9 Ver www.unhcr.org/writtencontributions](http://www.unhcr.org/writtencontributions) (disponible en ingl\u00e9s).\n[10 Para m\u00e1s informaci\u00f3n, ver https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/es/pacto-sobre-migraci%C3%B3n.](https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/es/pacto-sobre-migraci%C3%B3n)\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\nhogares cuando las condiciones as\u00ed lo permitan y, mientras tanto, podr\u00e1n contribuir con las\ncomunidades que los acogen. Para esas comunidades, esto significa que su propio desarrollo no se\nver\u00e1 afectado por la generosidad que han demostrado con las personas necesitadas.\n\n\nFinalmente, el Pacto Mundial buscar\u00e1 garantizar que las respuestas a las personas refugiadas se\n**basen en los derechos e integren las consideraciones de g\u00e9nero, edad y diversidad** en todo\nmomento. Una parte clave de esto es asegurar que las respuestas a las personas refugiadas\ninvolucren de manera activa y significativa a aquellos a quienes tienen la intenci\u00f3n de proteger y\nayudar, que promuevan la igualdad de g\u00e9nero y empoderen a las mujeres y las ni\u00f1as, y que combatan\nla discriminaci\u00f3n.\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial sobre los Refugiados no pretende crear cargas adicionales o imposiciones a los\npa\u00edses que acogen a un gran n\u00famero de personas refugiadas, ni tampoco modificar el mandato de\nprotecci\u00f3n y soluciones del ACNUR. Busca construir sobre el r\u00e9gimen internacional de refugiados que\nse ha establecido durante d\u00e9cadas \u2014y que contin\u00faa salvando vidas todos los d\u00edas\u2014 al compartir de\nmanera m\u00e1s equitativa y predecible las cargas y las responsabilidades.\n\n\n_\u00a9 ACNUR / Andres Loor_\n\n### **\u00bfQue contiene el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados? \u00bfQu\u00e9 hay de** **nuevo en el Pacto?**\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados se divide en cuatro partes [11] :\n\n\nI. Una **introducci\u00f3n** que establece los antecedentes del pacto, sus principios rectores y sus\nobjetivos, y aborda el tema crucial de la prevenci\u00f3n y las causas subyacentes;\n\n\nII. El **Marco de Respuesta Integral para los Refugiados,** adoptado por los Estados Miembros\n\n\n11 El Pacto propuesto est\u00e1 disponible en ingl\u00e9s en: www.unhcr.org/formalconsultations.\n\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\nde la ONU en la Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York;\n\n\nIII. Un **programa de acci\u00f3n** que apoya la puesta en marcha de las respuestas integrales, al\nestablecer medidas que los Estados y otras partes interesadas pertinentes puedan tomar para\ncompartir mejor la responsabilidad y cooperar m\u00e1s efectivamente en respuesta a los grandes\nmovimientos de refugiados y a las situaciones prolongadas de las personas refugiadas; y\n\n\nIV. Una secci\u00f3n de **seguimiento y revisi\u00f3n**, que incluye el desarrollo de indicadores, el balance\ndel progreso y la presentaci\u00f3n de informes.\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial tiene los mismos objetivos que el CRRF, espec\u00edficamente:\n\n\n1. **Aliviar las presiones** sobre los pa\u00edses que acogen un gran n\u00famero de personas refugiadas;\n\n\n2. Mejorar la **autosuficiencia de las personas refugiadas** ;\n\n\n3. Expandir el **acceso a soluciones en terceros pa\u00edses** (por ejemplo, reasentamiento y v\u00edas\n\ncomplementarias de admisi\u00f3n); y\n\n\n4. Fortalecer las **condiciones en los pa\u00edses de origen** que les permita a las personas\n\nrefugiadas retornar en forma segura y digna.\n\n\nEl programa de acci\u00f3n se divide en dos secciones: los \u2018 **arreglos para la distribuci\u00f3n de la carga y**\n**la responsabilidad compartida** \u2019 y las \u2018 **\u00e1reas que requieren de apoyo** \u2019. A pesar que el CRRF\nexpresamente se refiere a las grandes situaciones de refugiados, el programa de acci\u00f3n reconoce\nque otras situaciones\u2014 como cuando las personas refugiadas se trasladan junto a otras personas\nque participan en los movimientos o personas deslazadas internas, o cuando el desplazamiento\nforzado es el resultado de los desastres naturales repentinos y de la degradaci\u00f3n ambiental\u2014tambi\u00e9n\nplantean desaf\u00edos complejos para los Estados afectados y tambi\u00e9n pueden requerir el apoyo de la\ncomunidad internacional.\n### \u2018Arreglos para la distribuci\u00f3n de la carga y la responsabilidad compartida\u2019\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial establece una serie de medidas para promover la cooperaci\u00f3n internacional con\nel fin de apoyar a las personas refugiadas y a quienes los acogen, as\u00ed como a los pa\u00edses de origen,\ncuando procede, y para redoblar la b\u00fasqueda de soluciones.\n\n\n**A nivel mundial**, el Pacto establece un **Foro Mundial sobre Refugiados**, a nivel ministerial, reunir\u00e1 a\nla comunidad internacional cada cuatro a\u00f1os (a partir de 2019) para centrarse en los desaf\u00edos que\nenfrentan las personas refugiadas y los pa\u00edses de acogida, para ampliar la gama de actores que\nparticipan y brindan apoyo, y para revisar el progreso colectivo que se est\u00e1 alcanzando hacia una\ndistribuci\u00f3n de la carga y responsabilidad compartida m\u00e1s predecible y equitativa.\n\n\nEl Foro promover\u00e1 la participaci\u00f3n sostenida de la comunidad internacional en su conjunto en materia\nde refugiados y establecer\u00e1 un marco para adoptar nuevas medidas al brindar a los Estados Miembros\ny a otras partes interesadas pertinentes, la oportunidad de adquirir compromisos concretos hacia la\nimplementaci\u00f3n del Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados, y para discutir sobre oportunidades, desaf\u00edos y\nformas en las cuales la distribuci\u00f3n de la carga y la responsabilidad compartida se pueda mejorar a\u00fan\nm\u00e1s. Al garantizar la participaci\u00f3n de las personas refugiadas en un evento internacional a nivel\nministerial, el Foro Mundial sobre Refugiados tambi\u00e9n abrir\u00e1 nuevos caminos a la participaci\u00f3n de las\npoblaciones afectadas.\n\n\nSe buscar\u00e1n compromisos de una amplia gama de Estados y de otros colaboradores potenciales.\nPueden incluir:\n\n - Asistencia financiera, material y t\u00e9cnica;\n\n - Cuotas de reasentamiento y v\u00edas complementarias de admisi\u00f3n a terceros pa\u00edses; y\n\n\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\n    - Otras acciones que los Estados han elegido adoptar a nivel nacional en apoyo a los objetivos\ndel Pacto Mundial.\n\n\nA partir de 2023, el Foro tambi\u00e9n desempe\u00f1ar\u00e1 una importante funci\u00f3n en la **rendici\u00f3n de cuentas** .\nAdem\u00e1s de prever la adquisici\u00f3n de nuevos compromisos, le permitir\u00e1 a los Estados evaluar la\nimplementaci\u00f3n de los compromisos adquiridos anteriormente y de otros progresos encaminados a la\nconsecuci\u00f3n de los objetivos del Pacto Mundial, y de revisar la eficacia actual de los arreglos para la\ndistribuci\u00f3n de la carga y la responsabilidad compartida. Ser\u00e1 fundamental para esta rendici\u00f3n de\ncuentas un mecanismo para el **seguimiento de la implementaci\u00f3n de los compromisos y las**\n**contribuciones** que se establecer\u00e1n en consulta con los Estados Miembros y otras partes interesadas\npertinentes, as\u00ed como un proceso para **medir el impacto resultante de acoger, proteger y asistir**\n**a las personas refugiadas** . La evaluaci\u00f3n se realizar\u00e1 con base en los **indicadores** que se\ndesarrollar\u00e1n para evaluar el progreso y ser\u00e1 facilitado mediante una reuni\u00f3n de funcionarios de alto\nnivel con un intervalo de dos a\u00f1os entre los Foros para llevar a cabo una \u2018revisi\u00f3n de medio per\u00edodo\u2019.\n\n\n**En contextos espec\u00edficos de personas refugiadas a gran escala** \u2014ya sean nuevos o\nprolongados\u2014el Pacto Mundial sobre Refugiados establece que un Estado de acogida o un pa\u00eds de\norigen, cuando procede, particularmente necesitados de un amplio apoyo para responder a una\nsituaci\u00f3n de personas refugiadas a gran escala, podr\u00edan solicitar la activaci\u00f3n por parte del ACNUR\nde una **Plataforma de Apoyo** para apoyar sus arreglos de respuesta nacional y la implementaci\u00f3n\nde un plan integral dirigido a nivel nacional.\n\n\nUna Plataforma de Apoyo podr\u00eda reunir un grupo de Estados para galvanizar el compromiso pol\u00edtico,\nmovilizar asistencia para obtener respuestas integrales y facilitar la participaci\u00f3n temprana de actores\nde desarrollo (junto con esfuerzos humanitarios). Podr\u00eda basarse en compromisos relevantes\nadquiridos en el Foro Mundial sobre Refugiados y podr\u00eda iniciar la organizaci\u00f3n de una conferencia\nde solidaridad para ampliar la base del apoyo m\u00e1s all\u00e1 de los Estados participantes en la Plataforma\nde Apoyo.\n\n\nSe podr\u00eda invitar a otras partes interesadas a participar, cuando proceda, incluyendo las\norganizaciones y foros regionales y subregionales, instituciones financieras internacionales y\nregionales, organismos pertinentes de las Naciones Unidas, los representantes del sector privado y\nde la sociedad civil.\n\n\nAdem\u00e1s, estos arreglos se podr\u00edan apoyar en una serie de **herramientas para la distribuci\u00f3n de la**\n**carga y la responsabilidad compartida** que tienen como objetivo:\n\n\n    - Garantizar una **financiaci\u00f3n** oportuna, predecible, adecuada y sostenible, y el **uso efectivo y**\n**eficiente de los recursos** ;\n\n\n    - Incorporar el **enfoque de asociaci\u00f3n y de m\u00faltiples partes interesadas** como el m\u00e9todo\nest\u00e1ndar de respuesta; y\n\n\n    - Mejorar la disponibilidad de **datos y evidencias** fiables, comparables y oportunas.\n\n### \u2018\u00c1reas que requieren de apoyo\u2019\n\n\nCon base en las respuestas integrales pasadas y la aplicaci\u00f3n del CRRF, la segunda secci\u00f3n del\nprograma de acci\u00f3n\u2014\u2018\u00e1reas que requieren de apoyo\u2019\u2014destacan cuando la comunidad internacional\npuede canalizar \u00fatilmente el apoyo para una respuesta integral, coherente, predecible y centrada en\nlas personas a las grandes situaciones de refugiados, adaptadas al contexto espec\u00edfico y de acuerdo\ncon las estrategias y pol\u00edticas nacionales. Abarcan el ciclo completo del desplazamiento y abordan\ncuestiones, incluso la preparaci\u00f3n y la alerta temprana, acuerdos de recepci\u00f3n (incluso para aquellas\npersonas con necesidades espec\u00edficas), seguridad y protecci\u00f3n, medidas para apoyar a las personas\nrefugiadas y a las comunidades de acogida en la vida cotidiana (en \u00e1reas incluidas la educaci\u00f3n,\nmedios de vida y salud), y medidas para facilitar el acceso a las soluciones (incluida la repatriaci\u00f3n\nvoluntaria, reasentamiento y v\u00edas complementarias de admisi\u00f3n, integraci\u00f3n local y otras soluciones\nlocales). En particular, esta secci\u00f3n propone:\n\n8\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "PACTO MUNDIAL SOBRE REFUGIADOS: GU\u00cdA R\u00c1PIDA DEL ACNUR\n\n\n     - El establecimiento de un **Grupo de Apoyo a la Capacidad de Asilo**, compuesto por expertos de\ntodo el mundo, para brindar apoyo a las autoridades nacionales con el fin de fortalecer aspectos\nde sus sistemas de asilo con miras a garantizar su equidad, eficiencia, adaptabilidad e\nintegridad [12] ;\n\n\n_En Machha, L\u00edbano se est\u00e1 construyendo un nuevo dep\u00f3sito de agua para las personas_\n\n_refugiadas sirias y para las comunidades de acogida. El proyecto, el cual lo apoya la_\n_Uni\u00f3n Europea, ha brindado oportunidades de medios de vida a aproximadamente 200_\n\n_personas trabajadoras libanesas y sirias. \u00a9 ACNUR / Martin Dudek_\n\n     - El despliegue de recursos y pericia para **apoyar y fortalecer los sistemas nacionales** de forma\nque puedan facilitar el acceso a las personas refugiadas a una variedad de sectores, incluidos\neducaci\u00f3n, medios de vida y salud; y\n\n\n     - El desarrollo de una **estrategia trienal** para ampliar el acceso al reasentamiento y para aumentar\nla disponibilidad y previsibilidad de las v\u00edas complementarias de admisi\u00f3n en terceros pa\u00edses.\n\n### **\u00bfA partir de aqu\u00ed hacia d\u00f3nde vamos?**\n\n\nLa Declaraci\u00f3n de Nueva York prev\u00e9 que la Asamblea General considerar\u00e1 el Pacto Mundial\npropuesto por el Alto Comisionado \u2018en conjunci\u00f3n con su resoluci\u00f3n anual sobre la Oficina del Alto\nComisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados\u2019. Esta resoluci\u00f3n usualmente es adoptada\ncada mes de diciembre.\n\n\nEl Pacto Mundial representa una oportunidad \u00fanica para fortalecer la respuesta internacional a los\ngrandes movimientos de personas refugiadas y situaciones de refugiados prolongadas. Sin\nembargo, su \u00e9xito depender\u00e1 de la voluntad de la comunidad internacional para apoyar su\nimplementaci\u00f3n. La conclusi\u00f3n del texto, por lo tanto, no representa su fin, en su lugar representa\nel comienzo de un esfuerzo de la comunidad internacional para trabajar hacia los resultados\ncolectivos con un sentido compartido de direcci\u00f3n, prop\u00f3sito y rendici\u00f3n de cuentas. Es una\nherramienta de trabajo\u2014forjada en un entorno de multilateralismo cooperativo\u2014que contiene los\nelementos fundamentales para alcanzar mayores progresos hacia una distribuci\u00f3n de la carga y\nresponsabilidades m\u00e1s equitativas y predecibles hacia el futuro.\n\n\n12 Un documento no oficial sobre el Grupo de Apoyo a la Capacidad de Asilo est\u00e1 disponible en ingl\u00e9s en:\nwww.unhcr.org/formalconsultations.\n\n\n9\n\nACNUR / Septiembre de 2018\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e218b6c0-099b-365c-92b1-6f454686c4aa/5bbe32564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_125/raw/doc_125_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,72 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "4 febrero 2019\n\nEntre el 21 y el 25 de enero de 2019, ACNUR M\u00e9xico y el Programa Casa Refugiados (PCR) realizaron un\nejercicio de monitoreo de necesidades protecci\u00f3n de los flujos de personas presentados entre Guatemala y\nM\u00e9xico. El ejercicio se llev\u00f3 a cabo en el paso fronterizo del puente internacional en Ciudad Hidalgo, M\u00e9xico.\nFue un esfuerzo conjunto para la implementaci\u00f3n de un piloto de la herramienta regional de monitoreo de\nprotecci\u00f3n (PMT) de ACNUR, adaptado para el contexto de Norte de Centro Am\u00e9rica. El equipo conjunto de\nmonitoreo realiz\u00f3 409 entrevistas, representando 988 personas. Aunque la muestra no fue seleccionada\nesperando ser estad\u00edsticamente representativa, dada la ausencia de un listado completo de todas las\npersonas que han llegado a Ciudad Hidalgo y el car\u00e1cter m\u00f3vil de la poblaci\u00f3n, el tama\u00f1o logrado y el haber\nseleccionado las personas o grupos entrevistados de manera aleatoria de todas aquellas observadas durante\nlos d\u00edas de monitoreo, permite tener un alto nivel confianza sobre la precisi\u00f3n de los resultados, los cuales no\nobstante deben ser tomados como indicadores generales de las caracter\u00edsticas y situaci\u00f3n de la poblaci\u00f3n.\n\n\nLa mayor parte del muestreo fue realizado con personas que se encontraban esperando en el Puente\nInternacional entre Guatemala y M\u00e9xico en Ciudad Hidalgo. Muchas de las personas entrevistadas hab\u00edan\nsido pre-registradas por el Instituto Nacional de Migraci\u00f3n (INM), algunas otras no hab\u00edan llegado a\u00fan a este\npunto del procedimiento. El muestreo fue realizado tambi\u00e9n en zonas del Centro de Recepci\u00f3n donde aquellas\npersonas que ya hab\u00edan pasado por el registro del INM y procedimientos ante la Comisi\u00f3n Mexicana de Ayuda\na Refugiados (COMAR) se encontraban esperando la entrega de sus tarjetas de visitante por razones\nhumanitarias o sus constancias. En este sentido, esta es una muestra representativa de la poblaci\u00f3n que\nentr\u00f3 M\u00e9xico por el puente internacional en Cuidad Hidalgo durante las fechas indicadas, no necesariamente\nde la poblaci\u00f3n total que entra a M\u00e9xico desde Centroam\u00e9rica.\n\n\n\n**12,574**\n\n\nSolicitudes de visitante por razones\nhumanitarias registradas en M\u00e9xico\nentre el 17 y el 29 de enero de\n2019, en su mayor\u00eda de personas\ndel Norte de Centro Am\u00e9rica\n(NCA) **.**\n\n\n**PERFIL DEMOGR\u00c1FICO**\n\n\n\n**409**\n\n\nEntrevistas de protecci\u00f3n\nrealizadas de manera aleatoria\npor ACNUR a personas que se\nencontraban en Ciudad Hidalgo\n(Chiapas), frontera M\u00e9xicoGuatemala, entre el 21 y el 25\nde enero.\n\n\n\n**988**\n\n\nPersonas que integran los\ncasos entrevistados, que\nincluye grupos familiares. Se\nentrevist\u00f3 a una persona por\ngrupo, indagando sobre el\nperfil de los integrantes del\ngrupo con el que viaj\u00f3.\n\n\n\nEn general, el perfil demogr\u00e1fico de la muestra es consistente con los n\u00fameros oficiales del Instituto Nacional\nde Migraci\u00f3n de M\u00e9xico para esta poblaci\u00f3n (sexo, nacionalidad, y proporci\u00f3n de ni\u00f1ez). El **75%** de las\npersonas entrevistadas son de nacionalidad hondure\u00f1a, el **13%** guatemalteca, el **9%** salvadore\u00f1a y el **3%**\nnicarag\u00fcense. El **49%** de las personas entrevistadas viaj\u00f3 sola, el **17%** en grupos familiares de 2 personas,\nel **14%** en grupos de 3 personas y el **20%** restante en grupos de 4 o m\u00e1s personas.\n\n\n\n**NACIONALIDAD**\n\n\n\n**TAMA\u00d1O DE LOS GRUPOS**\n\n**ENTREVISTADOS**\n\n\n\n**49%**\n\n\n\nHonduras\nGuatemala\n\nEl Salvador\nNicaragua\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**SEXO Y EDAD**\n\n\n\n60+\n\n\n46-60\n\n\n36-45\n\n\n25-35\n\n\n18-25\n\n\n12-17\n\n\n5-11\n\n\n0-4\n\n\n\n**0%**\n\n\n\n**4%**\n\n\n**7%**\n\n\n**7%**\n\n\n**7%**\n\n\n**5%**\n\n\n\n**9%**\n\n\n**8%**\n\n\n\n**0%**\n\n\n**2%**\n\n\n**4%**\n\n\n**3%**\n\n\n**5%**\n\n\n**3%**\n\n\n\n**17%**\n\n\n**17%**\n\n\n\nDentro de los grupos entrevistados se encontr\u00f3 que:\n\n\n  - El **35%** de las personas son mujeres, el **64%**\n\nhombres y **1%** de otro sexo;\n\n  - El **31%** son ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes y el\n\n**69%** adultos;\n\n  - La mayor\u00eda est\u00e1 en rangos de edad\n\nproductiva, con un **51%** de personas entre 18\ny 35 a\u00f1os.\n\n  - Menos del **1%** son personas mayores de 60\na\u00f1os\n\n\n\nFemenino Masculino\n\n\nEl **93%** de las personas adultas han completado estudios de primaria, el **46%** de secundaria, y el **8%** estudios\nt\u00e9cnicos o universitarios. El **68%** indic\u00f3 estar haber estado realizando alguna actividad econ\u00f3mica en su pa\u00eds\nde origen, la gran mayor\u00eda como empleados informales, vendedores ambulantes, independientes o servicio\n\ndom\u00e9stico ( **58%** entre las tres categor\u00edas), con una minor\u00eda indicando haber sido empleado formal ( **9%** ).\n\n\n\n**NIVEL EDUCATIVO**\n\n_**(personas adultas)**_\n\n\n\n**OCUPACI\u00d3N EN PA\u00cdS DE ORIGEN**\n\n_**(personas adultas)**_\n\n\n\n\n\nUniversidad /\n\nPostgrado\n\n\n\n\n\nEstudios t\u00e9cnicos /\n\nvocacionales\n\n\n\nEscuela secundaria /\n\nbachillerato\n\n\nEscuela primaria\n\n\nNinguno\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**36%**\n\n\n\n\n\nEmpleado formal\n\nEmpleado informal\n\nIndependiente\n\nVendedor ambulante\n\nServicio domestico\n\nDesempleado\n\nEstudiante\n\nOficios de la casa\n\nOtro\n\n\n\n\n\n**NECESIDADES ESPEC\u00cdFICAS**\n\n\nPara un **18%** de las personas se identific\u00f3 alguna necesidad espec\u00edfica a partir de la entrevista. Dentro de las\nm\u00e1s frecuentes se encuentran:\n\n\n  - El **13%** de las mujeres entre 12-55 a\u00f1os est\u00e1n en embarazo o periodo de lactancia;\n\n  - El **8%** de las personas tiene una condici\u00f3n m\u00e9dica seria;\n\n  - El **9%** de las personas entrevistadas eran cuidadores \u00fanicos de sus hijos o hijas.\n\n\nAdicionalmente, se observa que el **9%** de los ni\u00f1os, ni\u00f1as y adolescentes (NNA) que integraban los grupos\nentrevistados no estaban acompa\u00f1ados o estaba separados de su padre, madre o cuidador legal,\nespec\u00edficamente: **7%** ni\u00f1os no acompa\u00f1ados y **2%** ni\u00f1os separados. Cabe se\u00f1alar que, seg\u00fan los datos\noficiales de INM, del total de 12,574 personas registradas, 2,978 fueron NNA y 100 de estos fueron registrados\ncomo NNA no acompa\u00f1ados (3% del total del NNA). El equipo de monitoreo tuvo la oportunidad de realizar\nentrevistas focalizadas a 21 de esos 100 NNA no acompa\u00f1ados registrados por las autoridades, lo que explica\nque la proporci\u00f3n de los mismos en la muestra sea superior a la registrada por el INM.\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**\u00daNICO CUIDADOR**\n\n\n\n**CONDICI\u00d3N M\u00c9DICA**\n\n**SERIA**\n\n\n\n**DISCAPACIDAD**\n\n\n\n**MUJER EMBARAZADA**\n\n_**(12-55 a\u00f1os)**_\n\n\n\n**MUJER LACTANTE**\n\n_**(12-55 a\u00f1os)**_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**NECESIDADES DE PROTECCI\u00d3N INTERNACIONAL:** _**Motivos multicausales**_\n\n\n_**MOTIVOS DE SALIDA**_\n\n\nEn su mayor\u00eda, las personas entrevistadas reportaron una combinaci\u00f3n de motivos que los llevaron a salir de\nsu pa\u00eds de origen, incluyendo un **31%** que indic\u00f3 hasta 2 motivos distintos e incluso un **37%** qu\u00e9 indic\u00f3 3 o\nm\u00e1s motivos. Para facilitar el an\u00e1lisis, las respuestas se agruparon en tres categor\u00edas: (i) motivos relacionados\ncon las condiciones de vida (falta de empleo, bajos ingresos, falta de acceso a DESC*) y reunificaci\u00f3n familiar;\n(ii) temor por la situaci\u00f3n de violencia o temor de ser perseguidos o agredidos; y (iii) ellos o sus familiares han\nsido v\u00edctimas de violencia (extorsi\u00f3n, agresiones, violencia sexual, etc.) y amenazas.\n\n\n*Derechos econ\u00f3micos, sociales, y culturales\n\n\n\n**MOTIVOS DE SALIDA DEL PA\u00cdS DE ORIGEN**\n\n**(Combinaci\u00f3n de motivos)**\n\n\n\n**MOTIVOS DE SALIDA DEL PA\u00cdS DE ORIGEN**\n\n_**(Combinaci\u00f3n de motivos)**_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**44%**\n\n\n\n**63%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLos resultados permiten observar que:\n\n\n\nViolencia\n\n\nViolencia + Condiciones\n\n\nCondiciones de vida\n\n\n\n\n - El **37%** de las personas entrevistadas indic\u00f3 que hab\u00edan salida de sus pa\u00edses por motivos relacionados\ncon condiciones de vida, sin mencionar motivos relacionados con violencia;\n\n - El **19%** indic\u00f3 que lo hab\u00edan hecho por motivos relacionados con violencia, bien sea el haber sido v\u00edctimas\nde violencia o amenazas directas ( **9%** ), o por el temor de resultar v\u00edctimas o ser perseguidos ante la\nsituaci\u00f3n de violencia generalizada ( **2%** ), o por una combinaci\u00f3n de victimizaci\u00f3n como de temor por la\nsituaci\u00f3n ( **8%** ), sin mencionar motivos relacionados con condiciones de vida;\n\n - Y el **44%** indic\u00f3 que hab\u00edan salido de sus pa\u00edses por la combinaci\u00f3n de motivos relacionados con\nviolencia (victimizaci\u00f3n o temor) y de aquellos relacionados a las condiciones de vida.\n\n\n_**En total, el 63% de las personas entrevistadas indic\u00f3 que el haber sido v\u00edctima y/o el temor por la**_\n_**situaci\u00f3n de la violencia formaron parte de las razones que motivaron su salida.**_\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_**RIESGOS AL RETORNO**_\n\n\nEn las entrevistas tambi\u00e9n se indag\u00f3 sobre los riesgos que la persona entrevistada tendr\u00eda si tuviera que\n\nregresar a su pa\u00eds de origen. Como en el caso de motivos de salida, las personas reportaron una combinaci\u00f3n\nde riesgos, los cu\u00e1les fueron agrupados en tres categor\u00edas: (i) riesgos por falta de acceso a DESC* (alimentos,\n\ntrabajo, servicios de salud); (ii) riesgos por la situaci\u00f3n de violencia generalizada en sus lugares de origen; y\n(iii) riesgos espec\u00edficos contra su vida, integridad o libertad a causa de amenazas.\n\n\n*Derechos econ\u00f3micos, sociales, y culturales\n\n\n\n**RIESGOS EN CASO DE TENER QUE RETORNAR**\n\n_**(Combinaci\u00f3n de riesgos)**_\n\n\n\n**RIESGOS EN CASO DE TENER QUE RETORNAR**\n\n_**(Combinaci\u00f3n de riesgos)**_\n\n\n\n**Riesgo por falta de**\n\n\n\nRiesgo por violencia\n\n\nRiesgo por violencia\n+ Riesgos por falta\nde acceso a DESC*\n\n\nRiesgo por falta de\nacceso a DESC*\n\n\n\n**34%**\n\n\n**30%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**integridad o libertad**\n\n\n\n*Derechos sociales, econ\u00f3micos, y culturales\n\n\nLos resultados permiten observar que:\n\n\n - El **30%** de las personas entrevistadas indic\u00f3 que tendr\u00edan riesgos relacionados con falta de acceso a\nderechos econ\u00f3mico y sociales, sin mencionar riesgos relacionados con violencia;\n\n - El **34%** indic\u00f3 que tendr\u00edan riesgos contra su vida, integridad o libertad dado situaciones de amenazas o\npersecuci\u00f3n que hab\u00edan experimentado o debido a la situaci\u00f3n de violencia en sus pa\u00edses;\n\n - Y el **36%** indic\u00f3 que tendr\u00edan tanto riesgos relacionados con falta de acceso a derechos econ\u00f3micos o\nsociales como riesgos contra su vida, integridad o libertad dado situaciones de amenazas o persecuci\u00f3n\nque hab\u00edan experimentado o debido a la situaci\u00f3n de violencia en sus pa\u00edses;\n\n\n_**En total, el**_ _**70% de las personas entrevistadas indic\u00f3 que tendr\u00eda un riesgo contra su vida,**_\n_**integridad o libertad y/o que estar\u00eda en riesgo por la situaci\u00f3n de violencia en su pa\u00eds de origen**_ .\n\n\nLa discrepancia entre el porcentaje de personas que indicaron motivos de salida relacionados con violencia\n( **63%** ) y aqu\u00e9l de personas que indicaron temor de regresar a su pa\u00eds por motivos relacionados con violencia\n( **70%** ), se asemeja a los resultaos del estudio realizado Matthew James Lorenzen sobre Ni\u00f1ez No\nAcompa\u00f1ada de Centro Am\u00e9rica en M\u00e9xico. [1] En este estudio la proporci\u00f3n de NNA que respondieron tener\nmiedo de regresar a su pa\u00eds tambi\u00e9n fue mayor que el porcentaje de los que aseguraron que la violencia fue\nuna de las causas que obligaron su salida del pa\u00eds de origen. Ambos hallazgos refuerzan la importancia en la\ndecisi\u00f3n metodol\u00f3gica de incluir ambas preguntas - causas de salida y riesgos en caso de retorno al pa\u00eds de\n\n\n1 Lorenzen, M. J. (s/f). Caracter\u00edsticas, tendencias y causas de la migraci\u00f3n de ni\u00f1as, ni\u00f1os y adolescentes desde, hacia y en tr\u00e1nsito por M\u00e9xico,\n2011-2016, incluido en la compilaci\u00f3n editada por el CONAPO. En CONAPO (Ed.), La situaci\u00f3n demogr\u00e1fica de M\u00e9xico 2016 (pp. 183\u2013207).\nRecuperado a partir de https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/232084/08_Lorenzen.pdf\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "origen- para lograr una mejor estimaci\u00f3n de la magnitud de las necesidades de protecci\u00f3n internacional de\npersonas extranjeras en M\u00e9xico.\n\n\nEn todo caso, es importante resaltar que, para la mayor\u00eda, la violencia y/o el temor de persecuci\u00f3n se\npresentaron como una de las razones para no regresar al pa\u00eds de origen. Eso puede indicar que aun si las\n\npersonas pueden ver la oportunidad de conseguir un mejor trabajo o acceso a derechos econ\u00f3micos y\nsociales como parte de su decisi\u00f3n de salida, la situaci\u00f3n de violencia presenta una gran motivaci\u00f3n para no\n\nvolver, sumado a que las condiciones de seguridad y sus experiencias con violencia han venido empeorando\ncon el tiempo.\n\n\n**INTENCIONES**\n\n\nEn cuanto a preferencias de residencia, el **46%** de las personas indic\u00f3 que prefer\u00edan reubicarse dentro de\n\nM\u00e9xico, el **30%** que quisiera ir a otro pa\u00eds, el **13%** quedarse en la ubicaci\u00f3n actual (Chiapas, M\u00e9xico) y el **9%**\n\nno lo sab\u00edan a\u00fan. S\u00f3lo el **2%** report\u00f3 querer regresar a su pa\u00eds.\n\n\nDe los que indicaron querer ir a otro pa\u00eds, el **98%** indic\u00f3 que ser\u00eda Estados Unidos. Por su parte, de los que\n\nindicaron querer reubicarse dentro de M\u00e9xico, los Estados m\u00e1s frecuentemente reportados fueron: Ciudad de\n\nM\u00e9xico ( **27%** ), Baja California ( **19%** ), Nuevo Le\u00f3n ( **18%** ).\n\n\n\nCiudad de Mexico\n\n\nBaja California\n\n\nNuevo Leon\n\n\nChiapas\n\n\nCoahuila de Zaragoza\n\n\nBaja California Sur\n\n\nChihuahua\n\n\nJalisco\n\n\nTamaulipas\n\n\nOtros\n\n\n\n**ESTADO DONDE LE GUSTAR\u00cdA REUBICARSE**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**27%**\n\n\n\nReubicarse\ndentro del pa\u00eds\n\n\nIr a un tercer pa\u00eds\n\n\nQuedarme aqu\u00ed\n\n\nNo lo s\u00e9\n\n\nRegresar a casa\n\n\n\n**DONDE LE GUSTAR\u00cdA QUEDARSE**\n\n\n**46%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**NECESIDADES PRIORITARIAS**\n\n\nEn cuanto a las necesidades prioritarias, la\n\nde mayor frecuencia indicada por las\n\npersonas entrevistadas fue el acceso a\n\ntrabajo ( **75%** ), seguida de alimentaci\u00f3n\n\n( **44%** ), acceso a vivienda ( **35%),**\n\nregularizaci\u00f3n ( **32%** ), poder apoyar\n\necon\u00f3micamente a sus familiares en pa\u00eds de\n\norigen ( **23%** ) **,** acceso a salud ( **19%** ) **,**\n\ntransporte ( **13%** ) y acceso a educaci\u00f3n\n\n( **13%** ).\n\n\n**CAR\u00c1CTER\u00cdSTICAS DEL TR\u00c1NSITO**\n\n\n\n**NECESIDADES PRIORITARIAS**\n_**(Hasta 3 respuestas posibles por grupo)**_\n\n\n\nAcceso a trabajo\n\nAlimentaci\u00f3n\nAcceso a vivienda\nRegularizaci\u00f3n de estad\u00eda legal\n\nEnviar remesas\n\nAcceso a salud\n\nTransporte\nAcceso a educaci\u00f3n\n\nOtro\nApoyo asistencia material\n\nDocumentos\nReunificaci\u00f3n familiar\nAsesor\u00eda legal / de protecci\u00f3n\n\nAcceso a justicia\n\n\n\n\n\nEl **45%** de las personas entrevistadas report\u00f3 haber viajado s\u00f3lo ella o con su grupo familiar, el **35%** en\ngrandes grupos (caravanas) y el **20%** con otras personas o grupos. Los medios de transporte utilizados con\nmayor frecuencia durante cualquier parte del trayecto fueron: bus con el **80%** de los entrevistados; caminando\n\ncon el **51%** de los entrevistados **;** - por auto-stop con el **39%.**\n\n\n\n**CON QUI\u00c9N VIAJARON**\n\n\n\n**MEDIOS DE TRANSPORTE**\n_**(M\u00e1s de una respuesta posible)**_\n\n\n\nS\u00f3lo la persona o\ngrupo familiar\n\nEn grandes grupos\n(caravanas)\n\nCon otras personas\n\n- grupos\n\n\n\n**80%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBus Caminando Auto stop Otros\n\n\n\nEl **25%** report\u00f3 haber sido v\u00edctima o testigo de alg\u00fan incidente de violencia\n\n- abusos en la ruta entre su pa\u00eds de origen y su llegada a M\u00e9xico. La\nmayor\u00eda de los incidentes reportados ocurrieron en Honduras (58%) y\nGuatemala (28%).\n\n\n\n**V\u00cdCTIMA DE VIOLENCIA**\n\n\n\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**ACCESO AL SISTEMA DE ASILO**\n\n\nEl **7%** de las personas entrevistadas (29 de 409) indic\u00f3 haber solicitado asilo en M\u00e9xico. Ahora bien, al analizar\n\u00fanicamente el 70% de la muestra correspondiente a personas que indicaron temor de regresar a su pa\u00eds de\n\norigen debido a riesgos contra su vida o integridad o temor de persecuci\u00f3n, se encuentra que la proporci\u00f3n\nque hab\u00eda solicitado asilo era del **12%** de estos casos. De aquellos que no lo hab\u00edan hecho, se observa que\n\nlas principales razones de no hacerlo tienen que ver con: desconocimiento o falta de informaci\u00f3n ( **45%** ), por\nestar en tr\u00e1nsito hacia otro lugar / pa\u00eds ( **29%** ); est\u00e1n considerando hacerlo ( **7%** ); porque no lo ven necesario\n\n- no le ven el valor a\u00f1adido ( **7%** ); o porque el procedimiento es largo ( **5%** ).\n\n\n\n**SOLICITUD DE ASILO EN MEXICO**\n\n\n\n**RAZONES DE NO SOLICITAR ASILO**\n\n\n\n**45%**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- Sobre el total de personas que indicaron\ntemor de regresar a su pa\u00eds.\n\n\n\nDesconocimiento / falta de inform.\n\nPorque est\u00e1 en tr\u00e1nsito\n\nEst\u00e1n considerando aplicar\n\nEl procedimiento es largo\n\nNo veo el valor a\u00f1adido\nNo le interesa / no es necesario\n\nNo podr\u00eda regresar a su pa\u00eds\n\nPiensa aplicar en otro pa\u00eds\n\nOtros\n\n\n\nIgualmente, para aquellos que no hab\u00edan solicitado asilo, al preguntarles si ten\u00edan intenci\u00f3n de hacerlo el **32%**\nindic\u00f3 que s\u00ed lo pensaban hacer en M\u00e9xico, el **18%** en otro pa\u00eds, el **38%** indic\u00f3 no saberlo a\u00fan y el **12%** que\nno ten\u00edan intenci\u00f3n. El **97%** de los que indicaron querer hacerlo en otro pa\u00eds reportaron que ser\u00eda en Estados\nUnidos. Por su parte, de aquellos que tienen intenci\u00f3n de solicitarlo en M\u00e9xico, el **22%** indic\u00f3 que lo har\u00eda en\nCiudad de M\u00e9xico, el **15%** en Chiapas, el **15%** en Nuevo Le\u00f3n, el **14%** en Baja California, el **5%** en Chihuahua\ny **5%** en San Luis Potos\u00ed, entre otros.\n\n\n\n**INTENCI\u00d3N DE SOLICITAR**\n\n**ASILO**\n\n\n\n**ESTADO DONDE TIENE INTENCI\u00d3N DE SOLICITAR ASILO EN**\n\n**MEXICO**\n\n\n\n**22%**\n\n\n\nNo\n\n\nNo sabe\n\n\n**Contacto**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCiudad de Mexico\n\nChiapas\n\nNuevo Leon\n\nBaja California\n\nChihuahua\nSan Luis Potosi\n\nCampeche\n\nBaja California Sur\n\nCoahuila de Zaragoza\n\nOtro Estado\n\n\n\n\n\nSi usted desea obtener mayor informaci\u00f3n del trabajo de ACNUR en M\u00e9xico, ponemos a su disposici\u00f3n el\ncontacto de nuestros oficiales de informaci\u00f3n p\u00fablica:\n\n\n\nSilvia Gardu\u00f1o\ngarduno@unhcr.org\n\n\n\nDaniel D\u00edaz\ndiazmayo@unhcr.org\n\n\n\nPierre-Marc Rene\nrene@unhcr.org\n\n\n\nwww.acnur.org/mexico 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/6e65d88c-53af-397a-8634-8046c2f6812b/5c59d76e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_126/raw/doc_126_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,82 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "January 2019\n\n# Ending childhood statelessness in Europe\n\n\n\nStatelessness hinders children from realising their rights. The\nfact that there are many children who are stateless or at risk\nof becoming stateless in Europe is therefore a serious concern.\nWhile not a new phenomenon, the numbers of children\nconcerned have been rising due the high arrivals of refugees\nand migrants in Europe in 2015/2016 [1] . States have clear legal\nobligations resulting from the ratification of relevant\ninternational and regional treaties to prevent childhood\nstatelessness and to take action to resolve existing cases.\nMoreover, Governments committed in the 2030 Sustainable\nDevelopment Agenda to achieve \u2018legal identity for all,\nincluding birth registration\u2019 (SDG Target 16.9), which has\npositioned the prevention and reduction of statelessness as a\ndevelopment issue.\n\n\nThis is a call to urgent action by States and regional\norganisations to bring an end to childhood statelessness. The\nissue is not insurmountable, and can be addressed by a series of\nlow-cost, effective and sustainable solutions.\n\n\nBeing nobody\n\n\nStateless children are not recognized as nationals by any\nState\u2019s domestic law. Children who are stateless feel the\nimpact in their daily lives in profound ways. Discrimination\nbased on statelessness, including limited access to critical\nservices such as education and health care, can expose\nchildren to protection risks including violence, abuse,\ntrafficking and other forms of exploitation. As they lack civil\ndocumentation, stateless children and their families face the\nrisk of arrest and detention. Living in limbo and constant\n\n\n\nuncertainty, in the absence of a legal status, also bears a\ndetrimental psychological impact for stateless children and\ntheir families.\n\n\n\u2018I want them to have what I did not have. I don\u2019t want\nthem to live my life [\u2026] I am nobody. If I disappeared\nfrom the face of the Earth, nobody would have known.\u2019\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 Ionela, Romania, mother of stateless Roma children\n\n\nStates\u2019 obligations to prevent childhood statelessness and to\ntake actions to resolve existing cases derive from both\ninternational and European law. As parties to the UN\nConvention on the Rights of the Child and the International\nCovenant on Civil and Political Rights, States are obliged to\nensure that each child is registered immediately after birth\nand has the right to acquire a nationality. [2] Under the UN\nConvention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, States\nmust protect stateless children and facilitate their\nnaturalisation. To do so, States should develop procedures to\nidentify stateless persons. [3] The UN Convention on the\nReduction of Statelessness [4] and the European Convention on\nNationality set out safeguards to ensure that foundlings and\nchildren born stateless in a territory acquire nationality. [5]\n\n\nStateless children in Europe\n\n\nThree groups of children are particularly affected by\nstatelessness in Europe.\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**1.** **Stateless children who come to Europe, mostly as**\n\n**refugee and migrant children, originating from**\n**countries with known stateless populations.** As the\noverall number of asylum-seeking children in Europe has\ngrown over the past few years\u2013 with a peak in 2015 and\n2016 \u2013 so has the number of children identified as\n\u2018stateless\u2019. As seen in Table 1, in 2017 over 2,000 children\nwho applied for asylum were registered as \u2018stateless\u2019.\nThis represents a fourfold increase of first-time asylum\napplications in the EU by children recorded as \u2018stateless\u2019\ncompared to 2010. Yet, in 2015 this number exceeded\n6,000. Some of these children come from countries with\nknown stateless populations.\n\n\n**2.** **Children who are born stateless in Europe due to lack**\n\n**of legal safeguards against statelessness and other**\n**practical obstacles.** This includes children who cannot\ninherit their parents\u2019 nationality due to gender\ndiscrimination, gaps in nationality laws, or other legal and\nadministrative obstacles, and children inheriting their\nparents\u2019 statelessness. As a result of the dissolution of the\nformer Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, for example, at\nleast 10,000 people remain affected by or are at risk of\nstatelessness in the Western Balkans, while the 2001\npopulation census in Ukraine recorded over 17,500\nstateless children.\n\n\n**3.** **Children born in Europe are at heightened risk of**\n\n**statelessness due to a lack of birth registration.** This\nincludes especially children of vulnerable minority\npopulations like the Roma both in EU member states and\nEU candidate and potential candidate countries.\n\n\n\u2018We did not go to school because we had to work with\nmy uncle in order to survive. It is not easy. I have been\nstopped by the police many times and threatened to\nbe arrested and fined, because I did not have an\nidentity card. I lived in fear.\u2019\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 Raman, born and raised stateless in Serbia, before\n\nhe acquired documents confirming his identity\n\n\n**No child should be stateless. With the appropriate legal**\n**and policy response, States can prevent and end child**\n**statelessness in Europe.**\n\n\nSituation 1: Stateless children arriving in Europe\n\n\n**Ahmed**\n\n\nAfter a perilous sea journey, 16 year-old Ahmed arrived in\nEurope in the summer of 2017 as an unaccompanied child. His\nmother lives in Kuwait and his father is a recognized refugee\n\n\n\nin bthe United Kingdom. Ahmed and his family are Bidoon, a\nknown stateless population mostly found in the Gulf States.\nThough Ahmed lived in Kuwait all his life, he was not granted\nnationality. When he arrived in Europe, he informed the\nauthorities of his situation but he was wrongly registered as\nan Iraqi national.\n\n\nIt is important to record the possible statelessness of refugee\nand migrant children from the moment of arrival.\nStatelessness may affect the outcome of their asylum claim.\nStatelessness may establish the risk of persecution in their\ncountry of origin as required by the 1951 Convention relating\nto the Status of Refugees; or the need for subsidiary\nprotection. Furthermore, countries of origin may not be willing\nto readmit a child following the rejection of his/her asylum\napplication and when return is considered in the best interests\nof the child if s/he is not considered a national of that country.\n\n\nThe actual number of children who arrived or are born\nstateless in Europe is unknown. Border guards, police,\nimmigration, asylum or civil registration officials may not be\nfamiliar with statelessness or are not equipped/authorized to\nidentify and determine people as stateless. Consequently,\nchildren may end up being registered as nationals of their\ncountry of origin or as \u2018nationality unknown\u2019. Table 1 shows\nthe considerable increase since 2013 in children seeking\nasylum in the EU registered under \u201cnationality unknown\u201d.\n\n\n**Table 1. First time asylum applications in the**\n\n**EU by children recorded as stateless or of**\n\n**unknown nationality**\n\n\nSource: Eurostat\n\n\n2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017\n\n\nStateless Unknown nationality\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Once possible statelessness is recorded, a proper assessment\nof a child\u2019s nationality or statelessness should take place. This\nrequires dedicated procedures with procedural safeguards\nand specialized staff trained in making such assessments.\nMany States lack a formal procedure to determine\nstatelessness. When a child who was displaced or migrated to\nEurope is determined to be stateless, he or she should have\naccess to rights and protection as per the Convention of the\nRights of the Child and the Convention relating to the Status\nof Stateless Persons. This includes access to facilitated\nnaturalization. [6] Only twelve countries of arrival, transit or\ndestination in the region have dedicated statelessness\ndetermination procedures in place. [7]\n\n\nScenario 2: Children born stateless in Europe\n\n\n**Stera and Mohamed**\n\n\nStera (12) and Mohamed (9) were born stateless in Europe.\nEven though they speak English like all their friends, they\nrealize they are different as they do not have the same access\nto services as their peers. They do not have a nationality\nbecause their father is a stateless Kurd who fled Syria, and\ntheir mother is a Syrian national. Under Syrian nationality law,\nmothers can confer nationality only in exceptional cases: if the\nchild was born in Syria and the father does not establish\nfiliation in relation to the child. However, due to the stigma\nassociated with having a child out of marriage, the exception\nis often not applied in practice. [8 ]\n\n\n\u00a9 Darrin Zammit Lupi / Islelanders Project supported by UNHCR\n\nChildren born in Europe to refugee or migrant parents may\ninherit their parents\u2019 statelessness. In addition, when women\nare unable to pass on their nationality to their children\nbecause of discriminatory laws in their countries of origin, and\nthose children do not acquire nationality from their father,\nthey are born stateless- highlighting the need to remove\ngender discrimination from nationality legislation. This may be\nthe case when the father cannot transfer nationality because\nhe is stateless, has died, has abandoned or been separated\n\n\n\nfrom the family or is unwilling or unable to do so. [9] If the\nnationality law and practice of the European country of birth\ndoes not provide a safeguard for children born stateless in\nthat country, these children will remain stateless for an\nextended period of time, or even their entire lives. [10]\n\n\nThe nationality laws of 17 European States automatically\nprovide nationality to a child who would otherwise be\nstateless and is born on their territory [11], even if further efforts\nare needed when it comes to the implementation of these\nlaws in practice. In other European countries, nationality laws\nimpose requirements for the acquisition of nationality by the\nchild born stateless that are not permitted under the\nConvention on the Reduction of Statelessness, thereby\nexcluding a number of children, like those in an irregular\nmigratory situation. [12]\n\n\nScenario 3: Statelessness and lack of birth\nregistration\n\n\n**The Elsanis**\n\n\nThe Elsanis are a Roma family of eight who live in a settlement\njust outside a coastal town in a successor State to the former\nYugoslavia. They are part of a group of over 1,000 people who\nspent years without formal recognition of their identity\nfollowing the war in Kosovo (UN Security Council Resolution\n1244/1999). Having fled without documents, they were unable\nto prove their identities. Without documents, the parents\ncould not register the births of their children. For years, the\nchildren could not access education, employment or health\ncare. Now they finally have birth registration and identity\ndocuments, and a pathway to citizenship, ending the\nuncertainty that kept the family deprived of basic human\nrights for almost two decades.\n\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR / Miomir Laban\n\nDespite high birth registration rates in Europe, not all children\nborn in Europe are registered at birth. Although birth\nregistration and acquisition of nationality are two separate\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "processes, birth registration facilitates the acquisition of\nnationality. Birth registration documents where a child was\nborn and who the child\u2019s parents are, key pieces of\ninformation needed to establish which nationality a child has\nacquired or can acquire. Without a birth certificate, it is\ndifficult to prove that the child has the relevant link to a State\nthat entitles him or her to nationality. This creates a risk of\nstatelessness for certain groups whose entitlement to\nnationality might be called into question, for example minority\ngroups, border-dwelling and nomadic communities, refugees\nand migrants. [13]\n\n\nIn Europe, children may end up not being registered at birth [14]\nwhen born outside medical centres, or when their parents are\nin an irregular migration situation and refrain from registration\nout of fear of being arrested, detained or deported. [15] Birth\nregistration is also hampered when undocumented parents\nare requested to submit their own identity documents and\nthey themselves were not registered at birth. [16]\n\n\nThe lack of birth registration is a problem especially among\nRoma communities. Data shows those living in informal\nsettlements and in extreme poverty are less likely to register\ntheir children. This is a result of social marginalization,\ncompounded by factors related to the dissolution of the\nformer Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, discrimination,\nand displacement due to the conflicts that affected the region.\nDespite efforts by many States, the EU and other institutions,\nthousands of children across Europe remain legally invisible,\nlacking papers to prove their existence or nationality and are\nhindered in exercising their rights. [17]\n\n\n\u00a9 UNICEF/UN0213863/Filippov\n\nOngoing UNHCR and UNICEF efforts\n\n\nUNHCR and UNICEF are in the frontline of many efforts aimed\nat addressing childhood statelessness in Europe. [18] In 2014,\nUNHCR launched the #IBelong Campaign to End\nStatelessness by 2024. [19] A global High-Level Meeting on\nStatelessness during UNHCR\u2019s Executive Committee meeting\nin October 2019 will mark the mid-point of the Campaign and\nassess achievements to date, showcase good practices and\n\n\n\nallow for pledges to address statelessness by States. UNHCR\ncounts on European States to play an active role in the leadup to the High-Level Meeting and to deliver concrete pledges\nso that the goal of ending statelessness is achieved by 2024.\n\n\nUNICEF advocates for the right to legal identity for every child\nand has worked closely with States in the region to pursue the\nregistration of every child at birth.\n\n\nBoth UN agencies support States in reviewing legislation and\npolicies to bring them in line with their international\nobligations regarding the right of every child to acquire a\nnationality.\n\n\n\nIn December 2016, UNHCR and UNICEF launched the\nCoalition on Every Child\u2019s Right to a Nationality. The Coalition\naims to expand and strengthen international co-operation to\nraise awareness about and combat childhood statelessness, as\nwell as promote the right of every child to acquire a\nnationality. Through advocacy, communication, cooperation\nand coordination, the Coalition seeks to:\n\n\n - Ensure that no child is born stateless;\n\n - Eliminate laws and practices that deny children\nnationality on discriminatory grounds;\n\n - Remove gender discrimination from nationality laws;\n\n - Improve birth registration to prevent statelessness; and\n\n - Encourage States to accede to the UN Statelessness\nConventions.\n\n\nIn the European context, the identification and protection of\nstateless children is a key area of importance. Thus far, joint\nUNHCR-UNICEF strategies have been developed in Albania,\nBosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo (UN Security Council\nResolution 1244/1999), the former Yugoslav Republic of\nMacedonia, Montenegro, Norway, and Serbia.\n\n\nAdvancing the agenda\n\n\nHowever, more can and should be done. With Governments\ncommitting through the Sustainable Development Goals to\nprovide legal identity for all, including birth registration as per\nSDG 16.9, UNHCR and UNICEF call for revitalised efforts to\naddress childhood statelessness in Europe.\n\n\n4\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNICEF and UNHCR call on European states to take the**\n**following actions:**\n\n\n**1.** **Ensure every stateless refugee or migrant child is**\n\n**properly identified and protected.**\n\n\n\n\n- Accede to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of\nStateless Persons and implement its provisions. [22 ]\n\n\n**2.** **Adopt safeguards to prevent statelessness at birth.**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- Ensure that potentially stateless children are recorded as\nsuch upon arrival and that their possible statelessness is\ngiven due consideration within asylum and civil\nregistration procedures while prohibiting the sharing and\nuse of the personal data collected for other purposes [20] ;\n\n\n- Establish a formal statelessness determination procedure in\norder to properly identify and protect stateless children and\nenable them to access specific rights and services, learning\nfrom countries that have such procedures in place [21] ;\n\n\n- Improve data collection and analysis on statelessness\nand its impact on children to better shape legislation,\npolicies and practices;\n\n\n- Review and amend legislation, policies and practices\nacross sectors so that all stateless children in the territory\ncan enjoy their rights and access services as per the\nConvention on the Rights of the Child;\n\n\n- Enhance the protection of identified stateless children by\nstrengthening resources and skills in the child protection\nsector, enabling qualified social workers to intervene and\nsupport the child from the earliest stage of identification;\n\n\n- Invest in training of judges and caseworkers involved in\nstatelessness determination, and of law enforcement,\nimmigration, asylum and civil registry officials who work\nwith stateless persons;\n\n\n- Simplify requirements and procedures for naturalisation\nfor stateless children, and provide legal aid and support\nto stateless children to realise their right to acquire a\nnationality as soon as possible; and\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- Accede to the Convention on the Reduction of\nStatelessness and amend legislation [23] accordingly in\norder to grant nationality automatically at birth or as\nsoon as possible after birth to children born stateless in the\nterritory; and\n\n\n- Strengthen the role of European regional bodies and\ninstitutions to address childhood statelessness in Europe\nand abroad.\n\n\n\n\n\n**3.** **Ensure every child is properly registered at birth.**\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": " - Reach out to stateless, at risk of stateless or marginalised\ncommunities through awareness raising campaigns and\nsocial work, identify children who are not registered at\nbirth and assist the child and his/her family with the\nregistration procedures;\n\n\n - Ensure that for every child born on their territory, a birth\ncertificate is issued, regardless of the child\u2019s and parents\u2019\nethnicity, nationality, documentation or migration status;\nand\n\n\n - Improve data collection and analysis on the situation of\nchildren not registered at birth and advocate for gaps in\nbirth registration to be closed through legislation,\npolicies and practice.\n\n\n**The European Union, the Council of Europe and the**\n**Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe are**\n**all crucial players in these joint efforts to address**\n**childhood statelessness. They can further strengthen their**\n**commitments by:**\n\n\n - Strengthening the Council of Europe and OSCE\u2019s\ncapacity to monitor and report on State\u2019s actions in\nregard to regional commitments and frameworks to\naddress childhood statelessness; and\n\n\n - Developing an EU strategy to address statelessness,\nwithin the European Union and beyond, building upon\nthe full set of EU policy and funding tools, both in EU\ninternal and external action;\n\n\n\n\n- [Monitoring the implementation of the European Council](http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/04-council-adopts-conclusions-on-statelessness/)\n[conclusions on statelessness by providing a biannual](http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/04-council-adopts-conclusions-on-statelessness/)\nreport on progress addressing statelessness;\n\n\n- Ensuring specialized agencies such as Frontex, EASO and\nthe Fundamental Rights Agency systematically include\nthe identification, recording and protection of stateless\nchildren and the prevention of statelessness in their work;\n\n\n- Supporting, through the wide range of EU funding\ninstruments, the further development and functionality\nof civil registry systems, including birth registration, to\nensure every child is registered at birth;\n\n\n- Addressing childhood statelessness in bilateral and\nmultilateral discussions with countries of origin, transit\nand destination as per the EU\u2019s Global Approach to\nMigration and Mobility [24 ] and its Framework for raising\nstatelessness with third countries [25] ;\n\n\n- Systematically promoting the rights of stateless children\nand the access to birth registration and civil registration\ndocuments in the negotiations with EU accession\ncountries and in relation to countries that have signed EU\nAssociation Agreements; and\n\n\n- Including the needs of stateless children and those at risk\nof statelessness in ongoing work on Roma integration\nunder the EU Framework for National Roma Integration\nStrategies up to 2020 and beyond.\n\n\n\n**Annex 1**\n**European State Parties to relevant international and regional instruments as of October 2018**\n\n\n**Convention** **State Parties**\n\n\n\n**Convention relating to the**\n**Status of Stateless Persons**\n28 September 1954\n\n\n**Convention on the**\n**Reduction of Statelessness**\n30 August 1961\n\n\n**Convention on the Rights**\n**of the Child**\n20 November 1989\n\n\n\nAlbania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,\nDenmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein,\nLithuania, Luxembourg, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania,\nSerbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,\nUkraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\n\n\nAlbania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,\nDenmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,\nLuxembourg, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Serbia,\nSlovakia, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\n\n\nAlbania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,\nCroatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Georgia, Greece, Hungary,\nIceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, Netherlands,\nNorway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, the Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia,\nSlovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine,\nUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Council of Europe, European**\n**Convention on Nationality**\n6 November 1997\n\n\n**Council of Europe,**\n**Convention on the**\n**avoidance of statelessness in**\n**relation to State succession**\n19 May 2006\n\n\n**Endnotes**\n\n\n\nAlbania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary,\nIceland, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Slovak Republic,\nSweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine\n\n\nAustria, Hungary, Luxemburg, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Moldova\n\n\n\n1 UNICEF, Uprooted; the Growing Crisis for Refugee and Migrant Children,\nSeptember 2016, available at [www.unicef.org/publications/files/Uprooted_gr](http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/Uprooted_growing_crisis_for_refugee_and_migrant_children.pdf)\n[owing_crisis_for_refugee_and_migrant_children.pdf.](http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/Uprooted_growing_crisis_for_refugee_and_migrant_children.pdf)\n\n2 See also the Joint general comment No. 4 (2017) of the Committee on the\nProtection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families\nand No. 23 (2017) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on State\nobligations regarding the human rights of children in the context of\ninternational migration in countries of origin, transit, destination and return,\n16 November 2017, CMW/C/GC/4CRC/C/GC/23, available at: www.refwold.org\n[/docid/5a12942a2b.html.](http://www.refwold.org/docid/5a12942a2b.html)\n\n3 For more about the definition of a stateless person, statelessness\ndetermination procedures and the rights of stateless persons, see UNHCR,\nHandbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, 30 June 2014, available at:\n[www.refworld.org/docid/53b676aa4.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/53b676aa4.html)\n\n4 There were 61 states party to the 1961 Convention in November 2014 when\nteams at UNHCR launched the Campaign to End Statelessness in 10 Years.\nAmong them 32 are in Europe.\n\n5 For more information on safeguards to prevent childhood statelessness\nunder the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, see UNHCR,\nGuidelines on Statelessness No. 4: Ensuring Every Child's Right to Acquire a\nNationality through Articles 1-4 of the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of\nStatelessness, 21 December 2012, HCR/GS/12/04, available at: [www.refworld.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/50d460c72.html)\n[org/docid/50d460c72.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/50d460c72.html)\n\n6 See note 4 above.\n\n7 Countries and territories in Europe with a statelessness determination\nprocedure include: Bulgaria, France, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Kosovo (UN\nSecurity Council Resolution 1244/1999), Latvia, Montenegro, the Republic of\nMoldova, Spain, Turkey and the UK. See for more information UNHCR, Good\nPractices Paper \u2013 Action 6: Establishing Statelessness Determination\nProcedures\n\n[d/57836cff4.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/57836cff4.html)\n\n8 Worldwide, 25 countries have nationality laws that do not allow women to\npass their nationality to their children on the same basis as men. See for more\nUNHCR, Background Note on Gender Equality, Nationality Laws and\nStatelessness 2018, 8 March 2018, available at: [www.refworld.org/docid/5aa1](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5aa10fd94.html)\n[0fd94.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5aa10fd94.html)\n\n9 Ibid.\n\n10 See for more UNHCR, Guidelines on Statelessness No. 4: Ensuring Every\nChild's Right to Acquire a Nationality through Articles 1-4 of the 1961\nConvention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 21 December 2012,\n[HCR/GS/12/04, available at: www.refworld.org/docid/50d460c72.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/50d460c72.html)\n\n11 Armenia, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Finland, France,\nGreece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, Moldova, Montenegro, Portugal,\nSlovakia, Spain and Turkey.\n\n12 See for more about causes of childhood statelessness in Europe: European\nNetwork on Statelessness, No Child Should be Stateless, September 2015,\n[available at: www.refworld.org/docid/5729b6d54.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5729b6d54.html)\n\n13 Worldwide, 290 million children do not possess a birth certificate, and nearly\n230 million children under the age of five have never been registered at birth.\nThe vast majority of unregistered children are born in the South Asian and\n\n\n\nsub-Saharan Africa regions and countries dealing with armed conflict or civil\nwar make up the majority of the countries with the lowest birth registration.\n[See UNICEF at: www.unicef.org/protection/57929_58010.html.](http://www.unicef.org/protection/57929_58010.html)\n\n14 Based on MICS 2011-2014, the percentage of children under the age of 5\nwhose births are reported as registered may vary among minority ethnic\ngroups, such as Roma, In Serbia, for example, while 99.4 per cent of children\nunder 5 of the national population had their birth registered, among Roma\nchildren within the same age group, this percentage was 95.30%. Similarly, in\nMontenegro, this ratio was 99.5 per cent for national children versus 94.5 per\ncent for children from Roma communities.\n\n15 See also Liliana Keith, Risks of statelessness for children of undocumented\nparents in Europe, 2017, available at: [www.statelessness.eu/blog/risks-](http://www.statelessness.eu/blog/risks-statelessness-children-undocumented-parents-europe)\n[statelessness-children-undocumented-parents-europe.](http://www.statelessness.eu/blog/risks-statelessness-children-undocumented-parents-europe)\n\n16 See also UNHCR, Good Practices Paper - Action 7: Ensuring birth\nregistration\nfor the prevention of statelessness, November 2017, available at: [www.refwo](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5a0ac8f94.html)\n[rld.org/docid/5a0ac8f94.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5a0ac8f94.html)\n\n17 See also UNHCR, \"This is Our Home\" Stateless Minorities and their Search\nfor Citizenship, 3 November 2017, available at: [www.refworld.org/docid/59e](http://www.refworld.org/docid/59e4a6534.html)\n[4a6534.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/59e4a6534.html)\n\n18 Since 1995, the mandate of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees has\nbeen expanded by the UN General Assembly to include responsibilities\nrelated to non-refugee stateless persons and prevention and reduction of\nstatelessness more broadly. These resolutions are universal in scope and do\nnot restrict UNHCR\u2019s activities to those states which are party to the\nstatelessness conventions.\n\n19 The UNHCR Global Action Plan to End Statelessness 2014 \u2013 2024 establishes\na guiding framework of 10 Actions to be undertaken by States to resolve\nexisting major situations of statelessness, prevent new cases from emerging\nand better identify and protect stateless populations. Available at:\n[www.refworld.org/docid/545b47d64.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/545b47d64.html)\n\n20 See Joint general comment No. 3 (2017) of the Committee on the Protection\nof the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and No.\n22 (2017) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on the general\nprinciples regarding the human rights of children in the context of\ninternational migration, 16 November 2017, CMW/C/GC/3CRC/C/GC/22, available at: [www.refworld.org/docid/5a1293a24.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/5a1293a24.html)\n\n21 See for more on statelessness determination procedures and the status of\nstateless persons: UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, 30\n[June 2014, available at: www.refworld.org/docid/53b676aa4.html.](http://www.refworld.org/docid/53b676aa4.html)\n\n22 See Annex 1 for the State Parties to the UN Convention Relating to the\nStatus of Stateless Persons.\n\n23 See Annex 1 for the State Parties to the UN Convention on the Reduction\nof Statelessness.\n\n24 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the\nCouncil, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee\nof the Regions, The Global Approach to Migration and Mobility, 18 November\n2011, available at: [eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0743&from=EN)\n[52011DC0743&from=EN.](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0743&from=EN)\n\n25 See Council of the European Union, EU Strategic Framework and Action\nPlan\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "in Human Rights and Democracy, 25 June 2012, available at: [www.consilium.](http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/131181.pdf)\n[europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/131181.pdf.](http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/131181.pdf)\n\n\n\n8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/46ea1466-27f2-3a4f-bee0-91145497d85c/5c63e7864.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_127/raw/doc_127_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,924 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# HIGHLIGHTS\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n### **Limitations**\n\n_This document aims at analysing the situation of refugee, migrant_\n_and asylum-seeking children, who have recently arrived in Europe_\n_(since 2015). However, due to challenges with data availability,_\n_some of the information below may refer to_ _**highly aggregate**_\n_**(proxy) data**_ _such as native-born vs. foreign-born children or_\n_children with migrant background._\n_There is_ _**no systematic or harmonized approach to data**_\n_**collection**_ _on refugee and migrant children in national education_\n_systems across Europe._ _**Data is often not comparable**_ _due to_\n\n\n1 2 3\n\n\n\n_the variety of indicators and definitions used in various databases/_\n_sources (including EUROSTAT and PISA), as well as different age_\n_groups, timeframe/points in time for data collection and insufficient_\n_disaggregation. This makes it_ _**complex to analyse**_ _issues_\n_particularly around_ _**school attendance and learning outcomes**_\n_among this specific group._\n_This document refers to data available_ _**as of December 2018**_ _,_\n_and therefore may not reflect more recent statistics that have_\n_become available in early 2019._\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "EUROSTAT",
-          "confidence": 0.8349094986915588,
-          "start": 153,
-          "end": 154
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.5823038220405579,
-          "start": 242,
-          "end": 243
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5302833318710327,
-          "start": 221,
-          "end": 222
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PISA",
-          "confidence": 0.57054603099823,
-          "start": 155,
-          "end": 156
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.5093351006507874,
-          "start": 242,
-          "end": 243
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5187012553215027,
-          "start": 221,
-          "end": 222
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n# I. SCHOOL-AGE REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n**THE BIG PICTURE**\n\n\n\nMost of the foreign-born school-age\nchildren and adolescents, born outside\nthe EU+, were hosted by **Germany**\n(688,669), **the** **United** **Kingdom**\n(569,308), **France** (555,192), **Spain**\n(492,520), **Italy** (389,180) and **Sweden**\n(215,601). Yet, in terms of overall\nproportion, foreign-born children made\nup barely **4-5%** across these countries,\nexcept Sweden where they represented\n**9%** of all school-age children.\n\n\n\nAs of 31 December 2018, out of the\n109,279,876 children and adolescents\nliving in EU+ countries [4], **5%** were **foreign-**\n**born** : 2,614,436 (2.4%) were born in\nanother EU+ country, and 3,949,286\n**(3.6%)** were **born outside the EU+** .\nRefugee and migrant children that arrived\nin Europe over the past few years can\ntherefore be considered a subset of the\nlatter group.\n\n\n\nAs of 1 January 2019, a total of\n**83,272,636** **children** **and** **adolescents**\n**were** **of** **school** **age** (5 to 19 years old [5] ).\nAmong them, 2,160,145 (2.6%) were\nchildren born in another EU+ State,\nwhile 3,487,701 **(4%)** were born outside\nthe EU+.\n\n\nAmong the latter group, **25%** were 5 to\n9 years old, **30%** were 10 to 14 years old\nand **46%** were 15 to 19 years old.\n\n\n\nNumber and proportion of foreign-born school-age\nchildren (5-19) by country of residence in Europe\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSource: Eurostat, 2018 annual data\n\n\n**2** ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n**EDUCATION PROFILES OF REFUGEE AND**\n**MIGRANT CHILDREN COMING TO EUROPE**\n\n\n\n**Central Mediterranean Route**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** More than a quarter of the children interviewed in Italy\nin 2017 [6] said they never went to school, while one\nthird managed to complete only primary school before\nstarting their journey to Europe.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Children from Nigeria, The Gambia and Guinea had the\nlowest education levels - more than a third reported\n\n\ntwo-thirds of children from\nNigeria, Bangladesh, The\nGambia, Guinea and Pakistan [7]\nreported having been more\nthan one year outside the\neducation system (34% for\n\n\n\n**Eastern Mediterranean Route**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** A quarter of children interviewed in Serbia, Greece, the\nRepublic of North Macedonia, Hungary and Bulgaria [9]\nhad not completed any formal level of education, while\nanother third completed only primary education prior\nto their arrival in Europe.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Children from Afghanistan and Iraq who arrived to\nEurope through the Eastern Mediterranean Route had\nthe lowest level of education, and more than one third\nhad reportedly never gone to school.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** More than half of Syrian, Afghan, Iraqi,\n\n\n[Republic, Pakistan, Afghanistan); UNICEF-REACH, Children on the Move in Italy](http://migration.iom.int/docs/Flow_Monitoring_Surveys_Top_5_Nationalities_2017_.pdf)\n[and Greece, 2017](https://www.unicef.org/eca/reports/children-move-italy-and-greece)\n\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n# II. ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN\n\n\n\n**Access to Education Based on**\n**Legal Status**\n\n\nAlthough all children\u2019s fundamental right\nto basic education is recognized under\ninternational and regional human rights\nlaw, including EU law [11], in practice the\ntype, quality and duration of schooling\noffered to asylum-seeking, refugee and\nmigrant children depends more on where\nthey are in the migrant/asylum process\nthan on their educational needs.\n**Children** **of** **EU-born** **migrants**\ngenerally have the right to be admitted\nto their host State\u2019s educational,\napprenticeship and vocational training\ncourses under the same conditions as\nnationals [12], including access to educationrelated social benefits [13] .\n**International protection beneficiaries**\n(refugees under the 1951 Convention\nand subsidiary protection holders) [14],\nthose enjoying temporary protection [15],\nas well as those with long term residence\nstatus [16] and those who are reunited\nwith family members lawfully residing\nin the EU [17], are also entitled to access\neducation under the same conditions as\nnationals, but they are not automatically\nentitled to associated benefits [18], which\npossibly restricts their ability to access\nquality education.\n\n\n\n**Asylum-seeking children** are also\nlegally entitled to access the host State\u2019s\neducation system on the same terms as\nthose that apply to nationals, although\nformal education may be provided in\naccommodation centres [19] . Education\nauthorities in the EU Member States\n(MS) shall not postpone access to\neducation for more than three months\nfrom the date on which children (or\ntheir parents) have lodged their asylum\nclaim, [20] although in practice, it could\ntake longer, and alternative classes in\nthe accommodation centres do not\nusually teach the full curriculum, or meet\nthe same teaching standards as local\nschools. EU FRA has reported additional\nrestrictions in some specific parts and\nregions in Germany, Greece (for the\nReception and Identification Centres)\nand Hungary. Children whose asylum\napplication has been rejected continue to\nhave access to basic education during the\nperiod granted for voluntary departure\nand during periods for which removal has\nbeen postponed [21] .\n**Migrant children in an irregular**\n**situation** (e.g. those who have not applied\nfor asylum or lack legal documents)\nare the most at risk of staying out of\nschool. Only seven EU MS have explicitly\nrecognized undocumented migrant\n\n\n\nchildren`s entitlement to basic formal\neducation (Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland,\nItaly, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden)\nwhile three MS explicitly exclude or limit\ntheir right to schooling (Hungary, Latvia\nand Lithuania). In most MS, the right to\neducation is provided to all children in the\ncountry, hence implicitly also to children\nstaying irregularly [22] . Nevertheless, as this\nright is not systematically guaranteed or\nfacilitated, local procedural requirements\ncan restrict or deter access. For example,\nschools may be obliged to report\nfamilies without valid documentation to\nimmigration authorities, which may deter\nsuch families from enrolling their children\ninto school [23] .\nFurthermore, schools may demand birth\ncertificates, prior education credentials,\nnational identification papers or proof of\nresidency to enroll.\nAccess to upper-secondary education,\nearly childhood education (ECE),\nvocational training, further learning and\nhigher education may also be highly\nconstrained as they are often not part\nof compulsory education recognized by\nnational law.\n\nSource: [EU FRA 2011](https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/fundamental-rights-migrants-irregular-situation-european-union)\n\n\n\n**4** ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n\n**ACCESS TO EDUCATION IN**\n**PRACTICE**\n\n\n_Data and definitions used across Europe_\n_do not allow for a full comparative analysis._\n_This section therefore provides a snapshot_\n_of the situation in selected European_\n_countries, illustrating_ _**the diversity of**_\n_**situations and disparities with regards**_\n_**to the availability, relevance and**_\n_**timeliness of data**_ _on refugee and migrant_\n_children\u2019s access to education. This is largely_\n_due to diverging national legislation, varying_\n_responsible authorities (national vs. federal/_\n_regional), and tools and methodologies to_\n_collect and analyse education data and_\n_statistics. Moreover, while in some countries_\n_data is recorded based on the migration_\n_status of children, in others this is done with_\n_a focus on citizenship or language skills._\n\n**Bulgaria**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _Refugee and migrant children are_\n_recorded_ _in_ _national_ _education_\n_statistics only if they are asylum-_\n_seekers or beneficiaries of international_\n_protection._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** As of the end of December 2018,\nschool enrolment for refugee and\nmigrant children was five times\nhigher compared to the 20162017 school year due to increased\noutreach and support provided by\nthe government and humanitarian\nagencies.\n\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **50%** or **81** out of **161** schoolage refugee and migrant children\naccommodated in government\nreception centres in December\n2018 were enrolled in primary and\nsecondary public schools, while a\ntotal of **121** asylum-seeking and\nrefugee children were registered\noverall in the formal education\nsystem in the beginning of the\n2018-2019 school year.\n\n\n**France**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _Refugee and migrant children appear_\n_in national education statistics only_\n_when they do not speak the language_\n_of instruction (French) and require_\n_additional language support._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Latest publicly available data from\nthe 2016-2017 school year indicates\nthat, among the **12.9 million**\nchildren enrolled in both public and\nprivate education, some **60,673**\nwere non\u2013French speaking [24] . Of\nthem, 29,701 were registered in\nprimary schools, 24,540 in lower\nsecondary and 6,432 in upper\nsecondary education.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** The majority of non-French\nspeaking children were registered\nin the Paris region (4 in every\n10 children), followed by LyonGrenoble, Marseille-Nice and\nNancy-Strasbourg regions.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** On average around **90%** of nonFrench speaking children were\n\n\n\nplaced in preparatory classes\n(specific classes for non-French\nspeaking children) or have\nbenefitted from additional language\nsupport.\n\n\n**Germany**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _Data on refugee and migrant children_\n_accessing education is only partially_\n_available at the regional level as data_\n_collection is not compulsory. It is_\n_therefore impossible to establish the_\n_situation for the entire country._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Access to formal education for\nrefugee and migrant children living\nwith their parents in reception\ncentres in Germany depends on\nthe specific regulations of the\nresponsible federal state and\nchildren\u2019s migration status. In\nmany states, access to schools\nremains limited, particularly for\nchildren from families originating\nfrom so-called \u201csafe countries and\nterritories of origin\u201d (e.g. Albania,\nBosnia and Herzegovina, Ghana,\nKosovo UNSCR 1244, the Republic\nof North Macedonia, Montenegro,\nSenegal and Serbia) [25], as speedy\nreturns are envisaged for this group.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Based on the 2016 [IAB-BAMF-](https://www.diw.de/en/diw_01.c.538695.en/research_advice/iab_bamf_soep_survey_of_refugees_in_germany.html)\n[SOEP Survey of Refugees, covering](https://www.diw.de/en/diw_01.c.538695.en/research_advice/iab_bamf_soep_survey_of_refugees_in_germany.html)\n4,500 parents of refugee and\nmigrant children, more than **98%**\nof primary school-aged children\nattended school in 2016. Yet, **less**\n\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "education data",
-          "confidence": 0.5933982729911804,
-          "start": 137,
-          "end": 139
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Bulgaria",
-          "confidence": 0.5649933218955994,
-          "start": 176,
-          "end": 177
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.7272962927818298,
-          "start": 10,
-          "end": 11
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "formal education\nsystem",
-          "confidence": 0.7346585988998413,
-          "start": 318,
-          "end": 321
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018-2019",
-          "confidence": 0.9031398892402649,
-          "start": 326,
-          "end": 327
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and\nmigrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.7441421747207642,
-          "start": 225,
-          "end": 229
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "national education statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.5711774826049805,
-          "start": 347,
-          "end": 350
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Bulgaria",
-          "confidence": 0.9880898594856262,
-          "start": 176,
-          "end": 177
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and\nmigrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.9558643102645874,
-          "start": 225,
-          "end": 229
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "publicly available data",
-          "confidence": 0.8699242472648621,
-          "start": 377,
-          "end": 380
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2016-2017",
-          "confidence": 0.6316314935684204,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 383
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n\n**than half** of these children received\nlanguage support. In terms of early\nchildhood education, findings for\nchildren aged 3 to 6 years were\nsimilar among refugee and migrant\nchildren and other children, but\namong the 0 to 3 age group,\nrefugee and migrant children were\nsignificantly under-represented.\n\n\n**Greece**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _National_ _inter-agency_ _education_\n_assessments capture data on all_\n_recently arrived refugee and migrant_\n_children regardless of their legal_\n_status._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** By December 2018, **11,500**\nrefugee and migrant children\nwere enrolled in Greek schools\nthroughout the country, an increase\nof 44% compared to the number of\nenrolled children by June 2018.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Based on [the latest assessment](https://www.unicef.org/eca/sites/unicef.org.eca/files/2019-04/EducationENG%20January%202019%20Urban.pdf)\nconducted by the national interagency Education Working Group\nwith support of the Ministry\nof Education, out of the 5,935\nassessed school-age children (417 years old) \u2013 regardless of\ntheir migratory status - living in\napartments, shelters and hotels for\nunaccompanied children, **62%** were\nenrolled in Greek schools.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Of the children in school undergoing\nthe assessment, **91%** were enrolled\nin schools on the mainland while\n**9%** were enrolled in schools on the\nGreek islands.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** In terms of gender breakdown, **66%**\nof all assessed girls and **67%** of all\nassessed boys present in Greece\nwere enrolled in schools.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Enrolment rate was higher among\nchildren who were 6-12 years old\n( **75%** ), followed by 13-15 years old\n( **62%** ), as well as 4-5 and 16-17\nyears old ( **57%** each).\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Enrolment rates were highest among\nPakistani, Afghan, Iraqi and Syrian\nrefugee and migrant children ( **73%**,\n**68%**, **67%** and **66%** respectively).\nThese were also the most common\nnationalities of refugee and migrant\nchildren enrolled in schools overall.\n\n\n\n**Italy**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _National_ _education_ _statistics_\n_distinguish only between Italian and_\n_non-Italian citizens._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** In the 2016-2017 school year,\n**634,070** non-Italian children were\nregistered in Italian schools (9.5% of\nall children enrolled).\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **46%** of non-Italian children were\nenrolled in primary education, **26%**\nwere in lower secondary education,\nand **29%** in upper-secondary\neducation. There is no data on preprimary school enrolment.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Among all non-Italian children in the\neducation system, **77%** (487,748)\nwere non-EU citizens.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Among the refugee and migrant\nadolescents who responded to\nUNICEF\u2019s [U-Report](https://onthemove.ureport.in/) on the Move\npoll on education, **49%** attended\nonly Italian language classes, while\njust **30%** attended regular classes,\nwith great variability among\ndistricts.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **86%** of young migrants and refugees\nanswering to the U-Report on the\nMove poll declared they would like\nto access vocational training. Yet,\nvery few of them were actually able\nto access such opportunities.\n\n\n**Serbia**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _National education statistics capture_\n_all recently arrived refugee and_\n_migrant children regardless of their_\n_legal status._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **51%** (413) of the 844 refugee\nand migrant school-age children,\nwho were accommodated in 16\ngovernment accommodation\ncentres in Serbia as of December\n2018, were enrolled in primary and\nsecondary schools.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **83%** of primary school-age children\n(129 out of 155) were enrolled in\n40 primary schools.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **100%** of lower secondary schoolage children (251 out of 251) were\nenrolled in 3 secondary schools.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **12%** of upper-secondary schoolage children (51 out of 438) were\nenrolled in 3 secondary schools.\n\n\n\n**Spain**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _National education statistics do not_\n_capture refugee and migrant children,_\n_and only partial data related to_\n_refugee and migrant children hosted_\n_in reception facilities is available._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **95%** of **6,200** **[26]** refugee and migrant\nchildren in reception facilities were\nenrolled in secondary education\nfor the school year 2017-2018.\nAmong them, **58%** were boys and\n**42%** were girls. Among the most\ncommon nationalities that arrived\nby sea and land, **21%** of Syrian\nchildren and **4%** of Palestinian\nchildren were enrolled in primary\nand secondary education.\n\n\n**Sweden**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** _National education statistics capture_\n_all students of foreign background_\n_(including_ _second_ _generation_\n_migrants), hence information on_\n_recently arrived refugee and migrant_\n_children is not available._\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** During the school year 2017-2018\nthere were 1,049,490 children\nenrolled in primary and lower\nsecondary education. **25%** of\nthem were of foreign background,\nand just **1%** were asylum-seeking\nchildren.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** Among the 347,863 children\nenrolled in upper secondary\neducation, **32%** were of foreign\nbackground. All children who\nwere registered with the national\npopulation registry and required\nSwedish language support were\nenrolled in language introduction\nprogrammes.\n\n\nSources: Greek Ministry of Education, Research and\nReligious Affairs; Greece Education Sector Working\nGroup Assessment on Access to Education for\nRefugee and Migrant Children- May 2018; Bulgarian\nMinistry of Education, Bulgarian State Agency for\nRefugees, Italian Ministry of Education, UNICEF\nU-report on the Move, National Education ReportGermany 2018, French Ministry of Education,\nSwedish Ministry of Education\n\n\n\n**6** ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "latest assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.6600887179374695,
-          "start": 155,
-          "end": 157
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "national interagency Education Working Group",
-          "confidence": 0.9160696268081665,
-          "start": 163,
-          "end": 168
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "assessed school-age children",
-          "confidence": 0.7798120379447937,
-          "start": 182,
-          "end": 185
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data on preprimary school enrolment",
-          "confidence": 0.521002471446991,
-          "start": 540,
-          "end": 545
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2016-2017",
-          "confidence": 0.8313043117523193,
-          "start": 464,
-          "end": 465
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "non-Italian children",
-          "confidence": 0.9342761039733887,
-          "start": 475,
-          "end": 477
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "the Move\npoll on education",
-          "confidence": 0.9230416417121887,
-          "start": 600,
-          "end": 605
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "young migrants and refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.5841994285583496,
-          "start": 649,
-          "end": 653
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "U-Report on the\nMove poll",
-          "confidence": 0.7812291979789734,
-          "start": 656,
-          "end": 661
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Serbia",
-          "confidence": 0.7653843760490417,
-          "start": 686,
-          "end": 687
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "young migrants and refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.693549633026123,
-          "start": 649,
-          "end": 653
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "national\npopulation registry",
-          "confidence": 0.9925415515899658,
-          "start": 1124,
-          "end": 1127
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.570381224155426,
-          "start": 1151,
-          "end": 1152
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n# IV. REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN LEARNING\n\n\n**School Attendance**\n\n\n\n_Improving school attendance and reducing_ _**early school leaving**_\n_are major issues for national education systems, affecting both_\n_native-born and foreign-born children (coming both from other EU+_\n_Member States and from outside the EU+). Refugee and migrant_\n_children are included in statistics related to foreign-born children and_\n_born outside the EU+._\n\n\nDue to a variety of reasons including the lack of adequate\nsupport, across all EU+ Member States, with the exception of\nthe United Kingdom, children and youth born outside the EU+\nare over-represented among those who leave early. Overall, early\nschool leaving among children born outside the EU+ (including\nrefugee and migrant children) is almost **twice as high** compared\nto native-born children (25.4% vs. 11.5%) for reasons explained\nbelow. This gap is most pronounced in **Austria, Belgium,**\n**Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Spain.**\n\n\nEarly school leaving or disengagement from education often\nrelates to the **socio-economic inequalities**, which affect\nmany refugee and migrant children, but also children\u2019s and their\nparents\u2019 education expectations, the school environment and\nrelations with teachers and peers. **Language** **barriers** **and**\n\n\nLevel of early school leaving among native, children\nborn in another EU+ country and children born\noutside the EU+, by country of residence.\n\n\n\n**difficulties with concentration and learning resulting from**\n**painful personal experiences**, as outlined on page 7, can also\nbe significant contributing factors.\n\n\n**Poverty** is a particularly important factor that may affect\nchildren and young people\u2019s engagement in education. Based\non the latest [Eurostat statistics](http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=yth_incl_020&lang=en) from 2013, young people\nborn outside the EU were nearly twice more likely to be at\nrisk of poverty compared to native-born young people (49% vs.\n28%). [29] Greatest disparities in poverty rates among native-born\nand foreign-born young people were found in Belgium, Greece,\nFinland, Spain and Sweden. Moreover, children with migrant/\nrefugee background tend to concentrate in suburban areas and\nschools with lower academic standards and performance levels,\nwhich may impact negatively on their participation in education\nand ultimately on their educational outcomes.\n\n\nCountries like **Czechia,** **Denmark**, **Portugal** **and** **the**\n**Netherlands and the UK**, have, nevertheless, managed to\nlimit the gap between native-born and foreign-born children\nborn outside the EU+. They also have some of the lowest levels\n[of early school leaving in Europe overall, already below the EU](http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf)\n\n\n\nSource: Eurostat, 2016\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.9427900910377502,
-          "start": 78,
-          "end": 79
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "EU+ Member States",
-          "confidence": 0.5299420356750488,
-          "start": 106,
-          "end": 110
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.6975706815719604,
-          "start": 10,
-          "end": 11
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN",
-          "confidence": 0.7426409125328064,
-          "start": 14,
-          "end": 18
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Eurostat statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.997634768486023,
-          "start": 361,
-          "end": 363
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2013",
-          "confidence": 0.9964474439620972,
-          "start": 367,
-          "end": 368
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "children and young people",
-          "confidence": 0.7675869464874268,
-          "start": 346,
-          "end": 350
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[strategy](http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf) target of 10% to be reached by 2020. This could be\nexplained by effective strategies to prevent early school leaving\nas part of broader social inclusion policies in countries with long\na tradition of immigration and/or strong equity focus in social\nwelfare systems.\n\n\nEarly school leaving may have a significant impact on adolescents\u2019\nand young people\u2019s transition from education to work. The EU has\ntherefore also been monitoring young people\u2019s disengagement\nfrom both the education and labour market, with latest statistics\nsuggesting that in the absence of appropriate interventions,\nforeign-born young people (aged 15-24) are overall much more\nlikely to be **neither in employment, nor in education or**\n**training (NEET)** than their native-born peers. This rate is even\nmore pronounced among young people born outside the EU+.\n\n\n**10** ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n\nThe highest shares of young people born outside the EU+,\nwho were NEET in 2017, were found in **Greece** (34.1%),\n**Italy** (33.5%), **Croatia** (28.2%), **Spain** (26%) and **France**\n(24.3%). In contrast, **Norway** (9.1%), **Luxembourg** (9.6%),\n**the Netherlands** (10.2%), **Hungary** (10.9%) and **Switzerland**\n(12%) observed the lowest shares of young migrants NEET, in\nmany cases due to targeted national policies to lower NEET\nlevels overall.\n\n\nSource: Eurostat Early School Leaving from Education and Training, 2016;\n[Eurostat NEET, 2007\u20132017; http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.org/wp-](http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Young_people_-_migration_and_socioeconomic_situation)\n[content/uploads/2015/02/SIRIUS-EarlySchoolLeaving-FINAL.pdf](http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SIRIUS-EarlySchoolLeaving-FINAL.pdf)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n**Learning Outcomes**\n\n\n\n_There is no systematic data available on the learning outcomes of_\n_refugee and migrant children. The best available comparable data is_\n_found in the \u2018Programme for International Student Assessment\u2019 (PISA)_\n_database, which allows for comparison between three categories \u2013_\n_native-born children, first-generation migrants and second-generation_\n_migrants. For the purpose of this assessment, refugee and migrant_\n_children are counted among the first-generation migrants._\n\n\nDue to a variety of reasons, including the lack of adequate\nsupport, first-generation migrant students can face learning\nchallenges resulting in lower academic performance. [30] Yet\ntheir resilience and learning outcomes improve significantly\nover time, when targeted education as well as wider social\ninclusion measures (e.g. language classes, homework support\nand psychosocial measures) are available to reduce various\ndisadvantages, as many children demonstrate a determination\nto improve their prospects in life. On average across EU+\ncountries in 2015, around **3 in 4** **native-born students** but only **3 in 5 students with a migrant background** **[31]**\n\n- attained the **baseline level of proficiency** in the three core\nPISA subjects: science, reading and mathematics.\n\n\nThe performance gap between native-born students and\nstudents with a migrant/refugee background is wider when\nit comes to first-generation migrant/refugee students, and\nespecially **late arrivals** (students who arrived at or after\nthe age of 12). This couples with overall challenges faced by\n**adolescents** (particularly aged 15+ years) in integrating into\nthe formal education system, as they go beyond compulsory\nschool age and are often not targeted by national educational\nintegration strategies.\n\n\nMigrant/refugee students are also more likely than nativeborn students to be victims of **bullying** and **perceived** **unfair**\n**treatment** by teachers, which may contribute to differences\nbetween native-born and migrant/refugee students in academic\nperformance and well-being.\n\n\n\nNevertheless, migrant/refugee students, especially from the\nfirst generation, tend to express **higher levels of motivation**\nthan native-born students. For example, the proportion of\nfirst-generation migrant/refugee students in the Netherlands\nand Belgium expressing a high motivation is 36 and 23 per cent\nrespectively higher than that of native-born students in these\ncountries.\n\n\nMoreover, **free pre-school** **programmes** can alleviate\ndisadvantages and increase equity, as they allow children\nwith a migrant/refugee background to interact with the local\ncommunity, learn the host country language and acquire\nimportant social competencies in structured settings. Based on\nPISA statistics, migrant/refugee students who had participated\nin early childhood education **attained higher scores** compared\nto their peers who had not attended such programmes **by an**\n**amount that corresponded to more than one year of**\n**school.**\n\n\n**Supportive school environment** and quality of teaching are\nother important factors in improving learning outcomes for\nchildren, including refugees and migrants. Literature shows\nthat measures can be multifaceted - developing mentoring and\ncultural mediation schemes, making adequate resources available\nto address socio-economic disadvantages, providing information\nabout the school environment, engaging with parents, ensuring\nadditional language support, strengthening anti-discrimination\nlegislation, etc. Examples of such measures already in practice in\nEuropean countries can be found below, in Section V.\n\n\nSources:\n[OECD, \u2018Assessment of Migrant Education\u2019, 2018](http://www.oecd.org/education/immigrant-students-at-school-9789264249509-en.htm)\nReception Education for Refugee and Migrant Children\n[EU JRC, Immigrant background and expected early school leaving in Europe:](http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC109065/jrc109065_techbrief_migesl_180202final.pdf)\n[evidence from PISA, 2018](http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC109065/jrc109065_techbrief_migesl_180202final.pdf)\n[UNESCO, \u2018Migration, Displacement and Education: Building Bridges, not Walls\u2019,](https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2019/migration)\n[2019](https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2019/migration)\nRAND Europe, \u2018Education of migrant children: Education policy responses for\nthe inclusion of migrant children in Europe\u2019\n\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **11**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Programme for International Student Assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.9980979561805725,
-          "start": 43,
-          "end": 48
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "PISA",
-          "confidence": 0.9977529644966125,
-          "start": 50,
-          "end": 51
-        },
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5809831023216248,
-          "start": 2,
-          "end": 3
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "EU+\ncountries",
-          "confidence": 0.8215831518173218,
-          "start": 180,
-          "end": 183
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.752620279788971,
-          "start": 10,
-          "end": 11
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2015",
-          "confidence": 0.9265336990356445,
-          "start": 184,
-          "end": 185
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PISA statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.9994196891784668,
-          "start": 512,
-          "end": 514
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "migrant/refugee students",
-          "confidence": 0.9966366291046143,
-          "start": 515,
-          "end": 519
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n# V. HELPING REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN ACCESS EDUCATION AND LEARN\n\n\n\n**Promising Practices at**\n**National and Local Level**\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Securing the right to education**\n**for every asylum-seeking child in**\n**Sweden**\n\n\nAccording to the Swedish School Act, once\na child has been registered and assigned to\na municipality to stay, (s)he has a right to\naccess education. This includes pre-school,\nand primary up to upper secondary school\n(if the child has not already turned 18). The\nright to education applies even if a decision to\nreject an application for asylum is announced,\nuntil the child has physically left Sweden. In\n2017, additional temporary measures were\nadopted to allow children and young people\nenrolled in upper secondary education,\nwhose asylum claims were rejected, to stay\nin Sweden until they complete their studies.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Encouraging irregular migrants in**\n**Portugal to send their children to**\n**school**\n\n\nPortugal\u2019s Aliens and Borders Service\nhas launched a go-to-school programme\ndesigned to regularize young children who\nwere born in Portugal to migrant parents and\nattend state schools, but who are not lawfully\nstaying in the country. Residence permits\nfor both the children and their parents are\ngranted or renewed directly at school, on the\nsame day, avoiding bureaucracy. This project\nalso includes local awareness-raising activities\naimed at all actors of each school community.\nThe programme considers education a social\ninclusion factor and encourages migrants in\nan irregular situation to place their children\nin school.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Mitigating financial disadvantages**\n**for migrant and refugee children in**\n**Estonia and Belgium**\n\n\nThe Estonian Multicultural School project\n(2017- 2020) aims to reform the structure\nof financial support available to schools with\na diverse student population and to change\nschool level approaches to multiculturalism.\nUnder a similar initiative in the Flemish\nCommunity of Belgium, schools receive\nadditional lessons or extra teaching hours to\ntarget socio- economic disadvantages. These\novertime hours are granted for a period of\nthree years and serve to develop a vision of\nthe school in terms of equal opportunities in\neducation.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Parental engagement in Germany**\n**and France**\n\n\nParental engagement can play an important\nrole in refugee and migrant children\u2019s\n\n\n\neducation. Through \u2018Neighborhood Mothers\u2019\nstarted in Berlin and then replicated across\nthe country, women with their own history\nof migration and integration are trained to\nact as contact and resource persons for\nfamilies and particularly other women in\nthe neighborhood (for instance by working\nin schools or by visiting families in their\nhomes). Similar programmes have also been\ndeveloped in Denmark and the Netherlands.\nSince 2009, the French government is\nimplementing a national programme\n\u2018Opening school to parents for successful\nintegration\u2019 which aims to engage parents of\nmigrant and refugee children. In 2017, over\n300 schools were involved, offering free of\ncharge French language and training courses\nfor parents, increasing their understanding of\nthe French education system and providing\nthem with practical advice on how to better\nsupport their children in the learning process.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Supporting school enrolment**\n**through coordination of all actors**\n**in Greece**\n\n\nIn 2016, the Hellenic Ministry of Education\nestablished \u2018afternoon reception classes\u2019 to\nwelcome refugee children aged 6-15 living\nin camps into classes in a second shift in\npublic schools. In 2017, the Ministry tripled\n\u2018morning reception classes\u2019 for children\nresiding in urban areas, so they can attend\nschool with Greek children within the\nregular school hours and receive additional\nGreek language support. Within the national\ninter-agency Education Working Group,\nall accommodation and education actors\ncombined efforts to enroll children in schools\nby sensitizing and accompanying parents and\nchildren through the registration process and\nbeyond.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Strengthening teachers\u2019 capacity**\n**to integrate refugee and migrant**\n**children in public schools in Bulgaria**\n\n\nOver the past years, the Bulgarian Ministry\nof Education supported the development of\nofficial programmes on teaching Bulgarian\nas a foreign language to refugees, provided\nadditional funding for Bulgarian language\nclasses and rolled out capacity building for\nteachers in public schools. These activities\nwere conducted with support by UNHCR\nand UNICEF.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Individualised learning plans for**\n**newly arrived children in Finland,**\n**the Netherlands and the UK**\n\n\nIn Finland, newly arrived refugee and migrant\nchildren benefit from an individual curriculum\nduring their first year in the formal\neducation system. Activities are tailored to\n\n\n\nchildren\u2019s specific needs and profile (being\nan unaccompanied child, coming from a war\nsituation, etc.). Similar approaches have also\nbeen developed in the Netherlands and the\nUK.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Fostering migrant and refugee \u2018role**\n**models\u2019 in Denmark**\n\n\nThe \u2018We Need All Youngsters\u2019 campaign,\nlaunched in 2002 by the Ministry of Refugee,\nImmigration and Integration Affairs, fosters\nexchanges between migrant and refugee\nchildren and \u2018role models\u2019 on the education\nsystem in Denmark. Information is shared,\nparticularly on vocational education &\ntraining, and activities are organised with\nvoluntary organisations such as online\nhomework caf\u00e9s. An evaluation showed that\n50% of participating students felt inspired by\nrole models and intended to complete their\neducation.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Preventing early school leaving in**\n**the Netherlands**\n\n\nTo address early school leaving among\nadolescents with motivational problems and\nlearning difficulties, the Dutch government\nadopted a national policy and developed\ntargeted decentralized programmes,\ncoordinated by an Early School Leaving\nTaskforce in the Ministry of Education.\nCrucial elements for the success of the\npolicy were the set-up of mandatory regional\nmonitoring and reporting tools, as well as the\nadoption of an integrated approach, linking\nschools with social services, municipalities\nand business sector. This has led to enhanced\nearly signaling and effective prevention of\nearly school leaving.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Supporting children beyond**\n**compulsory school-age in Finland**\n\n\nThe Helsinki \u2018skills centre\u2019 created in 2016,\ncombines vocational education, employment\nand language training services for refugee and\nmigrant adolescents who are 17+ years old,\nand whose language skills are not yet at the\nlevel needed for employment or vocational\ntraining. A similar system has been set up in\nLuxemburg.\n\n\nSources:\n[UNICEF, \u2018Improving Education Participation\u2019, 2017 ;](https://www.unicef.org/eca/reports/improving-education-participation)\n[UNICEF, \u2039Protection on Paper? An analysis of Nordic](https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/940-protected-on-paper-an-analysis-of-nordic-country-responses-to-asylum-seeking-children.html)\n[Country Responses to Asylum Seeking Children, 2018;](https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/940-protected-on-paper-an-analysis-of-nordic-country-responses-to-asylum-seeking-children.html)\n[EU FRA, Fundamental rights of migrants in an irregular](http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/fundamental-rights-migrants-irregular-situation-european-union)\n[situation in the European Union, 2011 ; OECD](http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/fundamental-rights-migrants-irregular-situation-european-union)\n[Assessment of Migrant Education, 2018; Sirius, Multi-](https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/oecd-reviews-of-migrant-education_20776829)\n[country partnership to enhance the education of refugee](http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/PERAE_Comparative-Report-1.pdf)\n[and migrant asylum-seeking youth in Europe, 2018;](http://www.sirius-migrationeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/PERAE_Comparative-Report-1.pdf)\n[Reducing early school leaving.EU, Policies on Early School](http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/policies_early_school_leaving.pdf)\n[Leaving in nine European countries: a comparative analysis](http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/policies_early_school_leaving.pdf)\n\n\n\n**12** ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**United Nations Role and Support**\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Technical assistance to**\n**governments:**\n\n\nUNICEF and UNHCR have provided\nguidance and technical assistance to\nnational authorities in Bulgaria, Greece,\nSerbia and the Republic of North\nMacedonia to address legal and other\npractical barriers and develop national\naction plans to integrate refugee and\nmigrant children in public schools. As a\nresult of national authorities and interagency efforts in 2018, over 12,000\nchildren were enrolled in public schools\nin Southeastern Europe (121 in Bulgaria,\n11,500 in Greece and 413 in Serbia).\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Non-formal education and**\n**after-school support:**\n\n\nIn 2018, UNICEF, UNHCR and IOM\nsupported the provision of non-formal\neducation, including homework support\nand psychosocial support for over 16,200\nchildren [32] enrolled in public schools\nin Greece, Italy, Serbia, Bulgaria and\nBosnia and Herzegovina, facilitating their\nintegration. In Italy and Greece, UNICEF\nalso developed e-learning platforms to\nhelp children improve their language skills\nand prepare for public school exams.\nIOM in Greece and North Macedonia has\nsupported extracurricular activities for\nnational and migrant/refugee students, in\nview of strengthening the formal learning\nprocess, fostering personal development\nand inclusion into the local community.\n\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Capacity-building for**\n**education professionals:**\n\n\nIn Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia, UNICEF\nand UNHCR supported capacity-building\nactivities for some 4,400 formal and nonformal education professionals in 2017\nand 2018. In Germany, early childhood\neducation and development has been\nan integral part of UNICEF trainings on\nthe minimum protection standards in\n100 centres for nearly 2,800 managers,\nprotection specialists and general staff.\n\n\nUNHCR has developed teacher training\nmaterials on the topic of refugees, asylum\nand migration, currently available in French,\nEnglish and Dutch (soon to be available\nin more languages). The toolkit includes\na module with professional guidance on\nteaching refugee children in the classroom,\ndealing with symptoms of stress and\ntrauma.\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Awareness raising and**\n**sensitization of the local**\n**communities:**\n\n\nIn Cyprus, Germany, Greece and Serbia,\nUNHCR, UNICEF, IOM and NGOs have\nworked on sensitizing local communities\non the importance of education for\nrefugee and migrant children.\n\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Education supplies:**\n\n\nIn Greece and Serbia, UNHCR, UNICEF\nand IOM have provided refugee and\nmigrant children with education materials\nand supplies. In Serbia, UNHCR also\nprovided furniture and equipment to four\nschools benefitting both local and refugee/\nmigrant children.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Transportation:**\n\n\nIn 2017 and 2018, IOM and UNHCR\nprovided school transportation for\nchildren from accommodation facilities to\npublic schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina,\nGreece and Serbia. The Bulgarian State\nAgency for Refugees also provided school\ntransportation for children from three\nreception centres in Sofia, Bulgaria.\n\n\n\u00d4 **\u00d4** **Child rights monitoring:**\n\n\nIn Greece, the Network for the Rights\nof Children on the Move led by the\nGreek Ombudsperson for Child Rights is\nregularly monitoring access to education\nfor refugee and migrant children, with\nUNICEF support. In Germany, UNICEF\nalso supported refugee reception centres\nin strengthening their monitoring systems\n(including access to education and\neducational outcomes) through practical\nguidance and tools.\n\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **13**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n# RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n\n1. _Ensure national legislation guarantees full and equal access for all children to inclusive and quality education in_\n_the formal education system, including access to catch-up programmes and accelerated learning opportunities,_\n_regardless of their asylum or migration status._\n\n2. _Provide targeted support through additional funds, programmes, guidance and capacity-building to schools,_\n_administrators and teachers to ensure accessible, quality and inclusive education for refugee, asylum-seeking_\n_and migrant children_ _[33]_ _._\n\n3. _Foster an inclusive school climate, which promotes student well-being and belonging and protects against_\n_instances of discrimination, bullying and exclusion of refugee and migrant children, through dedicated resources._\n\n4. _Because the risk factors for early school leaving are multifaceted, strengthen the linkages between schools and_\n_other critical public services (health, child protection, social protection, parental labour market support, etc.) to_\n_ensure that barriers to school enrolment and factors contributing to early leaving are addressed._\n\n5. _Ensure increased access to early childhood education services for young refugee and migrant children within the_\n_host community, and promote integration of refugee and migrant young people into upper secondary education_\n_including vocational education and training schemes in line with Article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of_\n_[the Child and of the EC Action Plan (2016).](https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160607/communication_action_plan_integration_third-country_nationals_en.pdf)_\n\n6. _Develop standard harmonized internationally accepted definitions or classifications to allow for informed policy_\n_development and resource allocation through the compilation and analysis of data on refugee, asylum-seeking_\n_and migrant children in existing education management information systems and international education_\n_databases._\n\n7. _Allocate adequate resources at sub-national, national and regional/ international level to ensure higher frequency_\n_and quality of relevant internationally-comparable data and statistics on refugee and migrant children\u2019s access_\n_to services, including education, through existing databases, e.g. Eurostat. This will allow for effective monitoring_\n_and timely decision-making._\n\n\n_[In 2018, UNICEF, UNHCR, IOM, Eurostat and OECD issued a Call to Action: Protecting children on the move starts with better data,](https://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Migration_advocacy_Feb20.pdf)_\n_which reiterates the fact that to ensure the protection of children affected by migration, data on children should be disaggregated by_\n_standard age categories, from early childhood to adolescence; by other demographic and socio-economic characteristics like disability,_\n_education level and whether they live with their parents; and by legal status. Data on access to essential services such as education_\n_is also essential._\n\n\n_[These messages were further reiterated and contextualized in UNHCR and UNICEF\u2019s suggestions for Strengthening Current Data on](https://wcmsprod.unicef.org/eca/sites/unicef.org.eca/files/2018-09/260418_UNICEF_UNHCR_Suggestions_Submission_EC_DG_Home_and_DG_Just_Final.pdf)_\n_[Refugee and Migrant Children in the EU](https://wcmsprod.unicef.org/eca/sites/unicef.org.eca/files/2018-09/260418_UNICEF_UNHCR_Suggestions_Submission_EC_DG_Home_and_DG_Just_Final.pdf)_ .\n\n\nUNHCR, UNICEF and IOM would like to acknowledge the support of the European Union, Government of Japan, Government\nof the United Kingdom, Government of United States, Governments of EU Member States, as well as UNICEF Global\nHumanitarian Thematic Funding partners [34] in making this publication possible and their ongoing support to the refugee and\nmigrant education response in Europe.\n\n\n**14** **ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "education management information systems",
-          "confidence": 0.8930208086967468,
-          "start": 297,
-          "end": 301
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.9218329787254333,
-          "start": 205,
-          "end": 209
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Eurostat",
-          "confidence": 0.8486082553863525,
-          "start": 355,
-          "end": 356
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5189920663833618,
-          "start": 371,
-          "end": 372
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.8720088005065918,
-          "start": 334,
-          "end": 338
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Data on access to essential services",
-          "confidence": 0.8595308065414429,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 464
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.7694112062454224,
-          "start": 482,
-          "end": 483
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Refugee and Migrant Children",
-          "confidence": 0.6726141571998596,
-          "start": 498,
-          "end": 502
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n**Number of children lodging asylum applications between January and December 2018**\n\n\nNumber of child asylumCountry [35] Main nationalities of asylum seeking children\nseekers registered in 2018\n\n\nGermany 78,130 Syrian (38%), Iraqi (11%), Afghan (7%) and Nigerian (5%)\n\n\nFrance 23,980 Albanian (11%), Georgian (9%), Ivorian (6%) and Syrian(5%)\n\n\nGreece 21,400 Syrian (29 %), Afghan (23%) and Iraqi (20%)\n\n\nSpain 10,815 Venezuelan (38%), Colombian (16%), Syrian (12%) and Ukrainian (6%)\n\n\nUnited Kingdom 8,805 Eritrean (7%), Syrian (2%) and Afghan (8%)\n\n\nItaly 8,380 Nigerian (9%), Gambian (8%), El Slavador (7%) and Pakistani (5%)\n\n\nAustria 6,160 Nigerian and Ukrainian (2% each)\n\n\nBelgium 5,640 Syrian (19%), Afghan (10%) and Palestinian (9%)\n\n\nSwitzerland 5,595 Eritrean (35%), Syria (13%), and Afghan (11%)\n\n\nSweden 5,340 Eritrean (4%), Syrian (18%) and Afghan (7%)\n\n\nSerbia 3,400 Nationality breakdown is not provided by the government\n\n\nNetherlands 4,660 Syrian and Eritrean (14% each) and Iranian (8%)\n\n\nCyprus 1,040 Syrian (62%), Iraqi (15%) and Somalian (5%)\n\n\nBulgaria 805 Afghan (46%), Syrian (26%), Iraqi (25%) and Pakistani (2%)\n\n\n[Source: Eurostat, extracted on 2 April 2019](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/asylum-and-managed-migration/data/database)\n\n\nACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR REFUGEE AND MIGRANT CHILDREN IN EUROPE **15**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**UNHCR \u2022 UNICEF \u2022 IOM** September 2019\n\n\n\nEndnotes\n\n1 European States used for this report include EU\nMember States, as well as Serbia.\n\n2 Age groups used as reference for school-age children\ndepend on national legislation and education systems:\n5-18 years old in Bulgaria, 3-17 years old in France,\n6-18 years old in Germany, 5-17 years old in Greece,\n6-18 years old in Italy, 7-18 years old in Serbia, etc.\n\n3 Compulsory school varies across countries, e.g. 5-16\nyears old in Bulgaria, 6-16 years old in France, 6-15\nyears old in Germany, 5-17 years old in Greece, 6-16\nyears old in Italy, 7-15 years old in Serbia.\n\n4 EU+ refers to EU Member states, Iceland, Liechtenstein,\n[Norway and Switzerland. Data source: Eurostat](http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=migr_pop5ctz&lang=en)\n\n5 European database [(Eurostat) does not allow for](http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=migr_pop5ctz&lang=en)\ndisaggregation by age up to 17 years. For the purposes\nof this analysis therefore the age bracket 5 to 19 has\nbeen used.\n\n6 Based on a sample of 364 children between 14 and 17\nyears old.\n\n7 Apart from Pakistan, the remaining four listed\ncountries were among the top 10 origin countries of\narrival between January and November 2017, when\nsurveys were conducted\n\n8 Based on [the UNICEF REACH report \u2018Children on](https://www.unicef.org/eca/reports/children-move-italy-and-greece)\n[the Move in Italy and Greece\u2019, 2017, 88% of children](https://www.unicef.org/eca/reports/children-move-italy-and-greece)\ninterviewed in Italy in 2017 reported to have suffered\nfrom physical violence. 81% of these incidents\nhappened in Libya. In addition, 38% of children\nreported having been forced to work or perform\nactivities against their will, mainly in Libya (97%).\n\n9 Based on a sample of 240 children between 14 and 17\nyears old.\n\n10 Save the Children, [Education Needs Assessment](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/47680)\n[Greece, 2016.](https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/47680)\n\n11 International Covenant on Economic, Social and\nCultural Rights (Article 13), Convention on the Rights\nof the Child (Articles 28 and 29), revised European\nSocial Charter (Article 17) and \u2013 for EU MS \u2013 to\nArticle 14(1) of the EU Charter of Fundamental\nRights.\n\n12 Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 on freedom of\nmovement for workers within the Union, OJ 2011 L\n141/1, pp. 1\u201312, Article 10; and Directive 2004/38 of\nthe European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April\n2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their\nfamily members to move and reside freely within the\nterritory of the Member States amending Regulation\n(EEC) No. 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/\nEEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/\nEEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/\nEEC (Free Movement Directive), OJ 2004 L 158,\npp.77\u2013123, Article 24 (1).\n\n13 See, for instance, ruling of the Court of Justice\nof the EU (CJEU), C-9/74, Donato Casagrande v.\nLandeshauptstadt M\u00fcnchen, 3 July 1974. Subsequently\nconfirmed in cases such as CJEU, C-3/90, M.J.E.\nBerniniv. Minister van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen,\n26 February 1992.\n\n\n\n14 Article 27 of the Directive 2011/95/EU of the\nEuropean Parliament and of the Council of 13\nDecember 2011 on standards for the qualification\nof third country nationals or stateless persons as\nbeneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform\nstatus for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary\nprotection, and for the content of the protection\ngranted (Recast) (Qualification Directive), OJ 2011\nL337/9 pp9\u2013268.\n\n15 Temporary Protection Directive (2001/55/EC).\nArticle14.\n\n16 (Directive 2003/109/EC) \u2013 concerning the status of\nthird-country nationals who are long-term residents,\nArticle 11\n\n17 Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family\nreunification, Article 14.\n\n18 Qualification Directive (recast), Article 27(2) in\nconjunction with Article 11(2) Long-term Residents\nDirective; (Directive 2003/109/EC) \u2013 concerning the\nstatus of third-country nationals who are long-term\nresidents; Article 11(2) and (4); Directive 2003/86/EC\non the right to family reunification, Article 14(1).\n\n19 Reception Conditions Directive (2013/33/EU), Article\n14(1).\n\n20 Reception Conditions Directive (2013/33/EU), Article\n14(2).\n\n21 Return Directive (2008/115/EC), Article 14(1) and\n17(3).\n\n22 Explicit right refers to national legislations,\nwhich explicitly stipulate all refugee and\nmigrant children as well as children in an\nirregular situation have access to education.\nImplicit right refers to national legislations, according\nto which all children on the territory of the country\nhave the right to education, hence implicitly\nalso referring to those in an irregular situation.\nYet, in practice this is subject to interpretation\nand national, regional or local procedures.\nLimited right refers to national legislations, according\nto which migrant children in an irregular situation are\nnot automatically entitled to the right of education.\nThis may be subject to conditionality (e.g. residing\nin certain type of facility or timeframe of status\ndetermination procedures, etc.) or interpretation by\nresponsible authorities.\n\n23 Such practices have been reported, for example in\nCyprus and Slovakia.\n\n24 This number does not include French-speaking\nrefugee and migrant children from West Africa\nor other countries, where French is a commonly\nspoken language. This may explain the relatively small\nnumber of non-French speaking children registered\nas the majority of refugee and migrant children in the\neducation system may actually already speak French\nupon arrival.\n\n25 According to current law, they may remain in\ninitial reception and arrival centres or \u2018special\naccommodation centres\u2019 until their return/repatriation.\n\n\n\n26 Figures are provided by six government partners\nwho provide services to children accommodated in\nreception centres and urban areas with the largest\nnumbers of refugee and migrant children (Madrid,\nBarcelona, Valencia, Seville, and Malaga).\n\n27 See footnote 22.\n\n28 EU FRA report refers only to asylum-seekers, however\nthis seems to be no longer the case in the current\nGreek education database.\n\n29 Eurostat measures the at-risk-of-poverty rate in\nrelative terms. It takes a relative poverty threshold\nof 60 % of the net median equivalised income, and\ndefines as being at-risk-of-poverty the population\nsegment below this threshold.\n\n30 Based on available PISA statistics (2016), on average\nacross OECD countries, as much as 51% of firstgeneration migrant students failed to reach baseline\nacademic proficiency in reading, mathematics and\nscience, compared to 28% percent of students\nwithout an immigration background.\n\n31 In the PISA database, a child with \u2018migrant background\u2019\nrefers to a child born outside the country of\nassessment/survey (first generation) or whose parents\nwere born in another country while he/she was\nborn in the country of assessment/survey (second\ngeneration). This includes asylum-seeking and refugee\nchildren.\n\n32 This includes some 8,000 children (incl. over 1,000\nyoung children 3-5 years old) supported by UNICEF\nin Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Greece and Italy;\n6,400 children supported by UNHCR in Greece and\nSerbia and another 1,800 children supported by IOM\nin Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Greece and\nSerbia.\n\n33 This may include guidance on the recognition of\nprevious learning and educational attainment,\nprogrammes on second language learning, literacy\nand homework assistance for such students, more\nopportunities and incentives for teachers\u2019 professional\ndevelopment, as well as the establishment of\npsychosocial support services at schools and parental\noutreach.\n\n34 Australian Committee for UNICEF, Belgian Committee\nfor UNICEF, Canadian Committee for UNICEF,\nDutch Committee for UNICEF, Finnish Committee\nfor UNICEF, French Committee for UNICEF, Hong\nKong Committee for UNICEF, Italian Committee\nfor UNICEF, German Committee for UNICEF,\nGovernment of Denmark, Government of the The\nNetherlands, Government of the Republic of Korea,\nNorwegian Committee for UNICEF, New Zealand\nCommittee for UNICEF, Swedish Committee for\nUNICEF, Swiss Committee for UNICEF Portuguese\nCommittee for UNICEF, United Kingdom Committee\nfor UNICEF, United States Fund for UNICEF,\nSpanish Committee for UNICEF, UNICEF Hungarian\nFoundation, UNICEF United Arab Emirates.\n\n35 Data presented in this table is based on Eurostat\nasylum data and represents only most common EU\nMember States. To access full dataset on children\n[asylum applications for 2018, see this link.](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/asylum-and-managed-migration/data/database)\n\n\n\nThis factsheet is jointly produced by UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM with\nthe aim to support evidence-based decision-making and advocacy on\naccess to education and related issues for refugee and migrant children\nin Europe. Based on publicly available datasets, this document provides\nan overview of the situation of refugee and migrant children in terms\nof education needs and profiles, ongoing activities, as well as remaining\nchallenges and barriers related to school enrolment and attendance. It\nalso analyses overall trends of learning outcomes and early school leaving\nas they correlate with the legal status/background of the child. Finally,\nit provides examples of existing good or promising practices, as well\n\n\n\nas recommendations, which could help address challenges and barriers\nlinked to children\u2019s access to education on one hand, and key data gaps\non the other.\n\n\nThe current factsheet covers data as of December 2018. However, due\nto the challenges described in the \u2018Data gaps\u2019 section, other relevant\nsources (i.e. data for previous years, or OECD data) have also been\nused as appropriate. This is stock data, representing the situation at a\ngiven point in time and does not reflect population movement impacting\nschool attendance.\n\n\n\nFor further information or any questions concerning this factsheet, please contact:\n\nUNHCR: **Javed Khan** [khanjav@unhcr.org \u2022 UNICEF:](mailto:khanjav@unhcr.org) **Tsvetomira Bidart** [tbidart@unicef.org \u2022](mailto:tbidart@unicef.org)\nIOM: **Ivona Zakoska Todorovska** [dtmmediterranean@iom.int](mailto:dtmmediterranean@iom.int)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Eurostat",
-          "confidence": 0.8487226366996765,
-          "start": 152,
-          "end": 153
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNICEF",
-          "confidence": 0.524768054485321,
-          "start": 244,
-          "end": 245
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.765500009059906,
-          "start": 233,
-          "end": 234
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.5396761894226074,
-          "start": 233,
-          "end": 234
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "children",
-          "confidence": 0.645715594291687,
-          "start": 202,
-          "end": 203
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "education system",
-          "confidence": 0.9119051098823547,
-          "start": 1109,
-          "end": 1111
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.9379183650016785,
-          "start": 1068,
-          "end": 1072
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Greek education database",
-          "confidence": 0.9383013248443604,
-          "start": 1214,
-          "end": 1217
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "OECD countries",
-          "confidence": 0.5232774615287781,
-          "start": 1269,
-          "end": 1271
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "asylum-seekers",
-          "confidence": 0.5237260460853577,
-          "start": 1200,
-          "end": 1201
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PISA statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.8927088379859924,
-          "start": 1260,
-          "end": 1262
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "OECD countries",
-          "confidence": 0.7446470260620117,
-          "start": 1269,
-          "end": 1271
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2016",
-          "confidence": 0.973992645740509,
-          "start": 1263,
-          "end": 1264
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "firstgeneration migrant students",
-          "confidence": 0.5047271847724915,
-          "start": 1278,
-          "end": 1281
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "country of assessment/survey",
-          "confidence": 0.8347873091697693,
-          "start": 1351,
-          "end": 1356
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.5900517106056213,
-          "start": 1355,
-          "end": 1356
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "asylum-seeking and refugee\nchildren",
-          "confidence": 0.9544274806976318,
-          "start": 1363,
-          "end": 1367
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Eurostat\nasylum data",
-          "confidence": 0.9848788380622864,
-          "start": 1612,
-          "end": 1615
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.7965075373649597,
-          "start": 1634,
-          "end": 1635
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "EU\nMember States",
-          "confidence": 0.8533412218093872,
-          "start": 1620,
-          "end": 1623
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "OECD data",
-          "confidence": 0.766743540763855,
-          "start": 1830,
-          "end": 1832
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "December 2018",
-          "confidence": 0.6878365874290466,
-          "start": 1798,
-          "end": 1800
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.5349783301353455,
-          "start": 1671,
-          "end": 1675
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/40a1f7f6-78d2-3a3b-adee-35976ca8775e/5d774e3e4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_128/raw/doc_128_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,379 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "In November 2018, Romana, 9, took shelter with her family in the UNHCR Transit Centre in Kutupalong camp in Bangladesh\nalong with other Rohingya newly arrived from Myanmar. Women and children continue to represent the majority of refugees on\nthe move in the region. \u00a9 UNHCR/Roger Arnold\n\n## **Searching for safety**\n\n\nFour years after the 2015 Andaman Sea crisis, refugees in South-East Asia continue\nto risk their lives, albeit in smaller numbers, to reach safety in hope of securing a\nbetter future for themselves and their families.\n\nSafe and legal pathways for refugees and asylum seekers, and regional cooperation\nto rescue those in distress, can prevent violations of human rights and loss of lives of\npeople on the move.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nThis report presents the trends of refugee movements in South-East Asia observed by UNHCR [1 ]\n\nbetween January 2018 and June 2019, highlighting the serious risks taken by people to cross\n\ninternational borders through irregular pathways. Recognizing the diversity of people on the move in\n\nthe region, this report also sheds light on several groups of economic migrants traveling along the\n\nsame routes as refugees.\n\n##### **Trends**\n\n\n**Persistent push factors in countries of departure**\n\n\nThe majority of refugees moving through South-East Asia are Rohingya, a stateless [2] Muslim minority\n\nfrom Myanmar. Rohingya suffer serious limitations on their basic human rights in their country of\n\norigin, depriving them of opportunities to lead decent lives and dimming their hopes for a secure\n\nfuture. Since August 2017, 741,947 Rohingya refugees have fled into neighbouring Bangladesh, [3] from\n\nthe northern part of Rakhine State in Myanmar to escape violence and persecution.\n\n\nIn late 2018 and 2019, the intensification of conflict between the Arakan Army, an ethnic Rakhine\n\nBuddhist armed group, and the Myanmar Armed Forces has led to increasing insecurity in northern\n\npart of Rakhine State, displacing approximately 22,000 people. [4] While these security developments\n\nhave not led to an appreciable increase in persons seeking international protection to date, they have\n\nnevertheless adversely impacted an already complex protection environment, exacerbating pre\nexisting challenges and difficulties for Rohingya to move and access livelihoods.\n\n\nIn Bangladesh, the Government with the support of the international community has mounted a large\n\nscale multi-sectorial response through the Joint Response Plan (JRP) to address the humanitarian\n\nneeds of some 906,500 refugees. [5] Despite these efforts, challenges for refugees remain. Restrictions\n\non livelihood and education opportunities, dwindling financial support to meet humanitarian needs,\n\nfragile peaceful coexistence with the hosting communities and the uncertain time period required to\n\nsecure a sustainable solution in Myanmar are factors compelling many refugees to move onward.\n\n\n_1 UNHCR Regional Mixed Movements Monitoring Unit conducted a total of 23 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 165 refugees and individual_\n\n_interviews with 152 refugees and key informants conducted in Thailand, Malaysia, Bangladesh and Indonesia during the reporting period. This_\n_data collection complemented UNHCR Country Offices ongoing protection and border monitoring activities in the region._\n\n_2 The international legal definition of a stateless person is \u201ca person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its_\n\n_law\u201d as per Article 1 of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons._\n\n_3 UNHCR Bangladesh Population Factsheet dated 30 June 2019, available at: https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/70123_\n\n_4 Estimates of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) provided by the Rakhine State Government as of 19 June 2019. Nonetheless, movements_\n\n_remained fluid, with frequent reports of new arrivals at displacement sites, alongside returns._\n\n_5 The 2019 Joint Response Plan For Rohingya Humanitarian Crisis (January \u2013 December) was launched on February 2019, available at:_\n_www.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.humanitarianresponse.info/files/documents/files/2019_jrp_for_rohingya_humanitarian_crisis_compressed.pdf_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nA Rohingya man who fled the armed conflict that affected his village. \u00a9 UNHCR/Samuel Siew\n\n\n**\u201cWe were caught in the crossfire\u201d**\n\n_\u201cWe were caught in the crossfire. Their stray bullets flew into our village and endangered us. Two_\n\n_of my relatives were killed [\u2026]. I did not feel safe to go to my field to farm or to the river to fish._\n\n_This means I was not able to earn a living to feed my family. This security situation was starving_\n\n_us. That is why I left [my country].\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**Women and children on the move**\n\nFour out of five refugees seeking safety in Bangladesh between January 2018 and June 2019 were\n\nwomen or children, 26% and 55% respectively. [6]\n\n\nIn the case of maritime movements, an estimated 59% of individuals who moved irregularly by sea (or\n\nattempted to) were women or children. [7] This represents a notable change from the period of 2013\n2015, when the large majority of persons engaging in similar journeys were men.\n\n\n**Bangladesh remains the main destination for those fleeing violence and**\n**persecution**\n\n\nRohingya refugees have continued to seek safety in Bangladesh and represent by far the largest\n\ngroup of refugees on the move in the region. Since January 2018 until June 2019, 17,907 Rohingya\n\nrefugees were registered as new arrivals in Cox\u2019s Bazar in Bangladesh. [8] Among them, most fled\n\ndirectly from Myanmar reporting ongoing persecutions while others journeyed to Bangladesh from\n\nIndia, where they had previously sought refuge, due to a shrinking protection environment, including\n\ntensions with the host community.\n\n\nAcross the region, small numbers of refugees have engaged in secondary movements from their initial\n\ncountry of asylum to another third country such as Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, India, Thailand,\n\nIndonesia or Malaysia. Refugees\u2019 decision to move to another country are made by the individual or\n\nthe family based on considerations of both push factors in the country of asylum and conditions in the\n\nintended country of destination. Although motivations such as the desire to be reunited with family or\n\ncommunity members in a third country play an important role in the decision to leave the first country\n\nof asylum, refugees strongly emphasized negative push factors as the main triggers for their\n\nsecondary displacement. Push factors commonly identified by refugees include physical threats,\n\ninability to meet basic needs often due to restrictions to access employment, fear of deportation,\n\ntensions with the host community, or inadequate education opportunities.\n\n\n_6 Among the 17,907 Rohingya refugees recorded as new arrivals in Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh, between January 2018 and June 2019, 55% were_\n\n_children, 26% women and 19% men._\n\n_7 This estimation is based on a sample of reports with known gender-and-age breakdown in countries of departure and destination including_\n\n_reports of arrests from the authorities, media reports, and interviews with refugees in the region._\n\n_8 UNHCR Bangladesh Population Factsheet dated 30 June 2019, available at: https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/70123_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA",
-          "confidence": 0.6287890672683716,
-          "start": 4,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9685229659080505,
-          "start": 124,
-          "end": 126
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "reports",
-          "confidence": 0.5617554783821106,
-          "start": 428,
-          "end": 429
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Cox\u2019s Bazar, Bangladesh",
-          "confidence": 0.568946361541748,
-          "start": 391,
-          "end": 397
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.6189941167831421,
-          "start": 403,
-          "end": 404
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9523066282272339,
-          "start": 384,
-          "end": 386
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR Bangladesh Population Factsheet",
-          "confidence": 0.9751808643341064,
-          "start": 460,
-          "end": 464
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8929339051246643,
-          "start": 460,
-          "end": 461
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Bangladesh",
-          "confidence": 0.9884223341941833,
-          "start": 461,
-          "end": 462
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.916127622127533,
-          "start": 467,
-          "end": 468
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9811011552810669,
-          "start": 453,
-          "end": 454
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**Small-scale resumption of maritime movements**\n\n\nAt least 1,597 refugees and migrants undertook maritime journeys in the Bay of Bengal and the\n\nAndaman Sea between January 2018 and June 2019. [9] In 2018, 762 persons were recorded as having\n\ntaken to the seas. This upwards trend has continued in 2019 with 835 people undertaking the same\n\njourney from January until the end of June. Most of these movements took place outside of the\n\nmonsoon season of June-September, when rough seas, heavy rain or storms are common. This\n\nrepresents a small-scale resumption of such movements after a two-year interruption in 2016 and\n\n2017. The 2018-2019 trend remained far below the numbers observed between 2013 and 2015 when\n\n50 times more people were taking similar routes.\n\n\nAs in previous years, vessels generally departed from coastal areas spanning Chittagong Division in\n\nBangladesh to Rakhine state in Myanmar. In Myanmar, people often departed from central Rakhine\n\nState where some 130,000 internally displaced persons continue to live in confined camps under\n\ndifficult conditions since 2012. Others left from villages where their freedom of movement is severely\n\nrestricted. Following their departure, vessels usually headed south-east towards Malaysia.\n\n\nThe modus operandi of maritime movements has evolved compared to 2015, when cargo boats or\n\nlarge fishing trawlers organized by smugglers were transporting between 300 and 1,000 people in one\n\ntrip. In 2018, refugees and migrants often relied on small fishing boats, bought directly from a local\n\nfisherman, with the capacity to transport between 20 and 100 persons each. In 2019, professional\n\nsmuggling networks were the primary facilitators of irregular maritime movements, using larger vessels\n\nwith the capacity to transport up to 200 people at once.\n\n\n_9 Mixed maritime movements are by nature clandestine, making the data on such movements difficult to independently verify. Unless stated_\n\n_otherwise, the information in this report is compiled from various sources including governments, implementing partners, media reports and_\n_interviews with persons of concern who have undertaken mixed maritime journeys in South-East Asia._\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**Mixed movements at sea**\n\nMixed movements refer to flows of people travelling together, generally in an irregular manner, over\n\nthe same routes and using the same means of transport, but for different reasons. Some men,\n\nwomen and children travelling in this manner often have been forced from their homes by armed\n\nconflict or persecution, while others are on the move in search of a better life. People travelling as\n\npart of mixed movements have varying needs and may include asylum-seekers, refugees, stateless\n\npeople, victims of trafficking, unaccompanied or separated children, and migrants in an irregular\n\nsituation.\n\n\nFor some economic migrants in South-East Asia, irregular migration is perceived as the most viable\n\noption due to established migration routes, costly and complex procedures associated with legal\n\nlabour migration, and porous borders. This is the case of small numbers of male Bangladeshi\n\nnationals who travelled along the same routes as Rohingya refugees in search of economic\n\nopportunities in Malaysia or other countries.\n\n\nSimilarly, in the Indian Ocean, small-scale mixed movements of Sri Lanka nationals by boat were\n\nalso recorded during the reporting period. If some headed east towards South-East Asia and\n\nbeyond, most travelled south-west. Between 2018 and June 2019, 291 Sri Lankan nationals reached\n\nthe French islands of La R\u00e9union and Mayotte, near Madagascar, after crossing the Indian Ocean in\n\nfishing vessels or makeshift rafts. Out of the seven boats, five departed from Sri Lanka, one from\n\nIndonesia and the most recent one from India. Upon arrival, national authorities conducted individual\n\nassessments of international protection needs. Those found not to be in need of international\n\nprotection were returned to their country of origin.\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**Interceptions at sea**\n\n\nFrom January 2018 to June 2019, 10 vessels were intercepted at sea shortly after their departure from\n\nBangladesh or Myanmar, with their occupants returned to shore and handed over to relevant\n\nauthorities, presumably before they could leave territorial waters. In addition, in at least two instances\n\nin 2018, the Thai navy intercepted vessels of Rohingya refugees. Food and water were then\n\nreportedly provided to passengers and their vessels escorted to international waters.\n\n\nIn the Indian Ocean and Laccadive Sea, five vessels were intercepted near or after departing from Sri\n\nLanka before they could reach their destination. [10] For instance, in May 2019, a vessel transporting 20\n\nSri Lankan nationals was intercepted by the Australian navy. According to the Australian authorities,\n\nthey were found not to be in need of international protection and were returned to Colombo.\n\n\n_10 Media reports suggest that a total of 187 persons were on board of these five ships._\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**The principle of non-refoulement for people at sea**\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Executive Committee (\u201cExCom\u201d) has emphasized the fundamental importance of fully\n\nrespecting the principle of non-refoulement [11] for people at sea, underlining that \u201cinterception\n\nmeasures should not result in asylum-seekers and refugees being denied access to international\n\nprotection, or result in those in need of international protection being returned, directly or indirectly, to\n\nthe frontiers of territories where their life or freedom would be threatened on account of a Convention\n\nground, or where the person has other grounds for protection based on international law. [12] \u201d\n\n##### **Dangerous journeys**\n\n\n**The vulnerability of those taking irregular pathways**\n\n\nPeople moving in an irregular manner often find themselves in vulnerable situations requiring\n\ninternational protection and humanitarian assistance. Refugees are particularly vulnerable in transit,\n\nas they often carry no travel or identification documents, having either lost them during flight, or are\n\nunable to obtain them from the authorities, for reasons of persecution or statelessness. As a result of\n\ntheir irregular status, refugees are often reluctant to approach the authorities for help in transit\n\ncountries or the destination country, fearing arrest, detention or deportation to their country of origin.\n\nThis places them at further risk of harm and allows abuses and exploitation to continue.\n\n\n**The heightened vulnerability of stateless persons**\n\nBeing stateless, Rohingya refugees experience additional challenges. Stateless persons often do\n\nnot have access to the rights that citizens take for granted, including the full protection of a state.\n\nStatelessness frequently means living without identity documents conferring legal personality and\n\nthe rights that go with them \u2013 access to health care, education, property rights, and the ability to\n\nmove freely. Births and deaths may not be registered with the result that stateless persons can be\n\nlegally invisible: their existence experienced, yet never legally recognized. It can also mean being\n\nshunned and discriminated against, and the added pressure of passing that stigma on to children\n\nand future generations.\n\n\n_11 The principle of non-refoulement is a cardinal principle of international refugee law, most prominently expressed in Article 33 of the 1951_\n\n_Refugee Convention. It prohibits any State conduct leading to the return of a refugee \u2018in any manner whatsoever\u2019\u2014including by way of_\n_interceptions of various kinds on land or at sea (whether in States\u2019 territorial waters, contiguous zones, or the high seas)\u2014to a place where they_\n_would be at risk of persecution related to a 1951 Refugee Convention ground or of other serious violation of human rights._\n\n_12 ExCom Conclusion No. 97 (LIV), 2003, para (a)(iv)._\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n_\u201cI was held captive by the smugglers for one and a half months, until my family paid the debt.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 44 years old, male]\n\n\nWithout safe and legal pathways to seek asylum, refugees and asylum-seekers are often compelled to\n\nuse smugglers and other risky measures to cross international borders in order to flee persecution and\n\nconflict. Aside from the inherent dangers of border crossings, these circumstances can result in\n\nrefugees being victims of exploitation, abuse, and trafficking along the way or upon arrival at their\n\ndestination. Refugees reported multiple incidents where smugglers kept smuggled persons captive for\n\nseveral weeks during which they inflicted severe pain and suffering with iron rods, bamboo sticks and\n\nother tools to extort increased payments from relatives. Violence was also used to enforce order and\n\nprevent demands for water and food during the irregular journey. Women and girls, especially those\n\ntravelling on their own, are particularly exposed to risks of sexual and gender-based violence.\n\n\n_\u201c[The smuggler] said: \u2018The agreement has changed. You have to pay now, or we will shoot you dead.\u2019_\n\n_He forced me to bow with my head touching the floor, then hit me on my back with a bamboo pole until_\n\n_I lost consciousness. The smugglers also put me in a set of boards with holes for my hands and feet,_\n\n_so I could not move for an entire day.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 44 years old, male]\n\n\nIn 2018 and 2019, refugees paid smugglers between $1,700 and $6,000 depending on the destination\n\nand means of transport. Such large sums require refugees to borrow money from neighbours or\n\ncommunity members. In Myanmar, Rohingya reported using their land, house or other belongings as\n\ncollateral. In Bangladesh and Myanmar, some refugees reported lending their food ration card in\n\nexchange for a loan, without alternative means of subsistence. The mounting debts resulting from this\n\nsituation and pressure to repay lenders renders refugees highly vulnerable to exploitation in countries\n\nwhere they often do not have the right to work.\n\n\n_\u201cThe smugglers kept me for five days. I saw men who could not pay being beaten. They didn\u2019t beat me_\n\n_or the other women, but they threatened us. The smuggler said, \u2018If you don\u2019t pay, we will bury you_\n\n_alive like those two,\u2019 and pointed at a mound of dirt some distance away. Two other captives were_\n\n_curious and walked over there to investigate. They came back and told me they saw a woman\u2019s hair_\n\n_sticking out of the dirt. I was very frightened.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 16 years old, female]\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nA Rohingya boy who fled his home country because of armed conflict\n\n\nand deprivation of education and livelihood opportunities. \u00a9 UNHCR/Samuel Siew\n\n\n**\u201c** _**The smuggler locked me in a room with other boys and beat me with an iron rod**_ **\u201d**\n\n\n_\u201cI decided to go on this journey myself; I did not tell my parents. My father is a labourer who could_\n\n_not find steady employment, he has to take whatever job is available. Because of the fighting in_\n\n_our area, it is very dangerous to move around, which stopped my father from finding work. He_\n\n_could no longer afford the 7,000 Kyat ($5) per month to send me to school. The teacher told me in_\n\n_front of my classmates that if my family cannot pay my school fees, I should stop coming to_\n\n_school. I felt so ashamed. I felt that since my future is blocked here, I needed to go to another_\n\n_country where I could work and send money to my family. I decided to travel with a smuggler who_\n\n_told me I did not have to pay anything in advance. But when I reached the city, the smuggler_\n\n_locked me in a room with other boys and beat me with an iron rod. He made me call my mother_\n\n_and turned on the speaker phone so she could hear me crying. He demanded the full payment_\n\n_from my mother. My parents had no choice but to sell their land to pay.\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**A perceived increase of risks taken by refugees**\n\n\nRefugees\u2019 perceptions of the dangers of their flight across international borders by land or sea are\n\nchanging. A survey conducted with several generations of Rohingya refugees in Malaysia highlighted\n\nthat the perception of the risks of the journey has increased over time. Among refugees in Malaysia\n\nwho arrived more than 20 years ago, 57% found the journey difficult but non-life-threatening, 29%\n\nhazardous and 14% very dangerous. For refugees who arrived less than five years ago, they\n\ndescribed their journey as being very dangerous (50%), dangerous (13%) or hazardous (38%). [13]\n\n\n**The specific dangers of the sea journey**\n\n\nMaritime journeys are perilous and sometimes deadly. At least 15 refugees and asylum seekers died\n\nor have gone missing when crossing rivers and seas between January 2018 and June 2019, [14]\n\nincluding 4 deaths during the first six months of 2019. [15]\n\n\n_\u201cThere was strong wind and rain, I felt scared. Our boat was about to capsize, the pilot told all the_\n\n_passengers to come to the back of the boat.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 16 years old, male]\n\n\n_13 This data is based on 49 individual surveys conducted from 24 to 30 November 2018 in Malaysia by the Regional Mixed Movements Monitoring_\n\n_Unit._\n\n_14 Available data on the death of refugees and migrants remain scarce and often overdue. These figures are a likely underestimate of actual_\n\n_fatalities due to the fact that most bodies are never found, especially following a disaster at sea, and many missing persons never reported._\n\n_15 The four Rohingya went missing in May 2019 while crossing between Myanmar and Bangladesh. In 2017, more than 200 Rohingya fleeing the_\n\n_violence in Rakhine with rafts and boats died between August and October 2017 alone after their crafts capsized. Many of the refugees who_\n_crossed from Myanmar to Bangladesh in 2018 and 2019 continued to use this dangerous route._\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9740732908248901,
-          "start": 41,
-          "end": 42
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.7635958790779114,
-          "start": 41,
-          "end": 42
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Malaysia",
-          "confidence": 0.9583540558815002,
-          "start": 50,
-          "end": 51
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Rohingya refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8983036279678345,
-          "start": 47,
-          "end": 49
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "49 individual surveys",
-          "confidence": 0.6478881239891052,
-          "start": 247,
-          "end": 250
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Regional Mixed Movements Monitoring_\n\n_Unit",
-          "confidence": 0.848887026309967,
-          "start": 261,
-          "end": 266
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Malaysia",
-          "confidence": 0.9836249351501465,
-          "start": 258,
-          "end": 259
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.9620842933654785,
-          "start": 172,
-          "end": 173
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and asylum seekers",
-          "confidence": 0.7658441662788391,
-          "start": 156,
-          "end": 160
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nAccording to UNHCR estimates, one person in 69 who embarked on the maritime journey in 2018 lost\n\ntheir life or went missing at sea. This is higher than the average 2013-2015 fatality rate when one\n\nperson in 81 died at sea. In previous years, smugglers were to blame for the majority of these deaths\n\ndue to beating, gunshot wounds or deprivation of food and water. Since 2018, the most common\n\nreason for death or disappearance at sea was due to boats in distress. This means boats that were\n\nlost at sea, had engine troubles, or ran out of food, water or fuel. Dangers were made more acute by\n\nthe absence of professional sailors on board and the fact that vessels used by refugees were usually\n\nnot built for, equipped, or in a good state of maintenance required to take a long journey on the open\n\nseas.\n\n\n_\u201cWe were desperate, drifting at sea without food or water.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 33 years old, male]\n\n\nOn 11 June 2019, 64 Rohingya refugees were on board this vessel when it washed ashore after experiencing engine trouble\nand running out of fuel and food. The passengers were found in Koh Rawee, an island located in southern Thailand. They were\nidentified as victims of trafficking by the Thai authorities. Credit: Thailand Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant\nConservation; 11 June 2019\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nA Rohingya boy who was rescued after his boat ran aground. \u00a9 UNHCR/Samuel Siew\n\n\n**\u201c** _**We could easily have drifted into the open sea where no one would find us**_ **\u201d**\n\n\n_\u201cWe left from Bangladesh by boat with about 160 people on board. We spent 12 days [at sea]_\n\n_waiting for the boat to fill up, then we started to sail. We did not get enough food or water, so we_\n\n_were hungry and thirsty. When we approached the smugglers to give us more, they beat us with_\n\n_iron rods. For the last one and a half days of the journey, we had no food at all. We were_\n\n_crammed into the lower deck. The captain had a gun and fired it into the air three times,_\n\n_threatening to shoot us if we tried to go outside. When it rained, we got wet, and because I was_\n\n_damp all the time, I got sick with a fever. After one week, I heard we reached Malaysia, but while_\n\n_we were waiting [\u2026], our boat ran out of fuel, and we drifted. The wind pushed our boat to an_\n\n_island, where we were rescued. We could easily have drifted into the open sea where no one_\n\n_would find us. I am thankful to have survived.\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 14\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n##### **Focus on the response to mixed movements at sea**\n\n\n**Search and Rescue at Sea**\n\n\nThere are clear duties under international maritime law, and a longstanding maritime tradition, to\n\nassist persons in distress at sea. The duty to assist persons in distress at sea applies \u201cregardless of\n\nthe nationality or status of such persons or the circumstances in which they are found.\u201d [16] The duty to\n\nassist thus applies in respect of all refugees and migrants in distress at sea, regardless of their\n\nparticular status or circumstances.\n\n\nIn April 2018, local Indonesian fishermen were exemplary in fulfilling their duty to come to the aid of 84\n\nrefugees in distress, whose vessels were lost at sea. The vessels had no qualified crew and had\n\nexhausted food, water and fuel supplies. 10 people died or went missing at sea on one of the vessels\n\nbefore the survivors were rescued and disembarked to a place of safety. In addition to Presidential\n\nRegulation No.125 determining governmental agencies\u2019 response to new arrivals of refugees and\n\nmigrants, the Indonesian Search and Rescue Agency has developed operational procedures to\n\nensure coordinated rescue at sea and disembarkation of refugees and migrants in distress at sea.\n\nThese remain, however, the rare examples of good practices in the region.\n\n\n**Disembarkation to a place of safety, identification of needs and response**\n\n\nAlthough international maritime law does not provide for categorical obligations where a State is duty\n\nbound to allow disembarkation on its territory, key treaties indicate that the State responsible for the\n\nsearch-and-rescue region in which a rescue takes place is required to \u201cexercise primary responsibility\n\nfor ensuring such co-ordination and cooperation occurs, so that survivors assisted are disembarked\n\nfrom the assisting ship and delivered to a place of safety.\u201d [17]\n\n\nIn 2016, the Member States of the Bali Process, an international forum to discuss issues relating to\n\nirregular movement, smuggling and human trafficking, agreed on the Bali Declaration. This document\n\nexpressed, among others, encouragement for states to work together to identify more predictable\n\ndisembarkation options for irregular migrants stranded at sea. [18] Three years later, no regional\n\n\n_16 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (\u201cSOLAS Convention\u201d), 1974, Annex, Chapter V, Regulation 33(1); International_\n_Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (\u201cSAR Convention\u201d), 1979, Annex, para 2.1.10._\n\n_17 SOLAS, Annex, Chapter V, Regulation 33(1-1); International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (\u201cSAR Convention\u201d), 1979, Annex,_\n\n_para 3.1.9. For relevant non-binding International Maritime Organization (IMO) guidelines, see in particular IMO, Rescue Guidelines, and IMO,_\n_Principles Relating to Administrative Procedures for Disembarking Persons Rescued at Sea, 22 January 2009, FAL.3/Circ.194, available at:_\n_www.refworld.org/docid/524be8244.html (\u201cDisembarkation Principles\u201d)._\n\n_18 The 2016 Bali Declaration, at paragraph 5, called upon states to \u201cimprove identification of those with protection needs\u201d, \u201cidentify more_\n\n_predictable disembarkation options\u201d, and \u201cencourage further capacity building of the relevant agencies in search and rescue operations.\u201d The_\n_2016 Bali Declaration is available at: https://bit.ly/2lTmMyD_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\narrangements have yet been established to ensure predictable disembarkation options as an essential\n\ncomponent of a protection-sensitive response to mixed maritime movements in South-East Asia.\n\nNevertheless, the establishment in January 2017 by the Bali Process of a Task Force on Planning and\n\nPreparedness (TFPP) is a positive development to encourage increased cooperation between states\n\nto promote protection at sea. Although states\u2019 response to mixed movements by sea has remained to\n\ndate uncoordinated and ad-hoc, the TFPP with the support of the Regional Support Office to the Bali\n\nProcess (RSO) has taken steps to foster cooperation between key stakeholders and support a more\n\npredictable response.\n\n\n**A place of safety**\n\nThe International Maritime Organization\u2019s 2004 Rescue Guidelines indicate that a place of safety\n\nis a place:\n\n    - where the survivors\u2019 safety of life is no longer threatened;\n\n    - where their basic human needs (such as food, shelter and medical needs) can be met; and\n\n    - from which transportation arrangements can be made for the survivors\u2019 next or final\n\ndestination.\n\n\nAs per available information, vessels transporting refugees and migrants were disembarked in\n\nBangladesh (2%), Indonesia (7%), Malaysia (47%), Myanmar (33%), and Thailand (10%) during the\n\nreporting period. Survivors of the sea journey are often in poor health and may be victims of gender\nbased violence or trafficking. They require expert support to address their protection, medical and\n\npsychosocial needs. State practices vary but efforts should be recognized.\n\n\nIn Thailand, government multi-disciplinary teams conduct a screening to identify victims of trafficking.\n\nIf found to be victims of trafficking, they are transferred to shelters to facilitate their rehabilitation and\n\ninvestigations of suspected smugglers. When vessels carrying refugees have landed in Aceh in\n\nIndonesia, local authorities lead the initial response to new arrivals by sea, providing shelter and\n\nassistance to survivors including minors, in line with Presidential Regulation No. 125 adopted in\n\nDecember 2016. In Malaysia, UNHCR works closely with the National Human Rights Institution\n\n(SUHAKAM) to address the protection needs of new arrivals by sea. UNHCR and its partners have\n\nenhanced preparedness activities, identifying relevant expertise and capacities to deploy in the event\n\nof larger number of new arrivals by sea.\n\n\nUpon request, UNHCR provides support to destination countries to identify those with international\n\nprotection needs, conduct best interest determinations for unaccompanied refugee minors, as well as\n\nprovide translation services to support the authorities\u2019 initial response. In the context of mixed\n\nmovements, a prompt screening of international protection needs can facilitate timely returns, in safety\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 16\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\nand dignity, of those found not to need international protection or with no compelling humanitarian\n\nneeds.\n\n\nA girl facing an uncertain future in detention. \u00a9 UNHCR/ Rachakorn Surabhakdi\n\n\n**\u201cHe told me my trip would be smooth and no harm would happen to me\u201d**\n\n\n_\u201cThe broker who smuggled me said I would be safely delivered to my fianc\u00e9e who is living in_\n\n_another country. He told me my trip would be smooth and no harm would happen to me. But the_\n\n_reality was totally different. We were crammed into cars and trucks, it was so hot inside and_\n\n_sometimes I could hardly breathe. I felt dizzy and vomited many times. We were fed when the_\n\n_vehicles stopped, but sometimes we travelled for one or two days straight without any food, and_\n\n_not enough water._\n\n\n_My journey ended when I was arrested before I reached my destination. I was brought to a_\n\n_government facility and am kept here. I am no longer free. I cannot talk to my parents or fianc\u00e9e._\n\n_In Myanmar, we could not leave the village because of the security situation, but at least I could_\n\n_walk around and talk to people. Now I can\u2019t go anywhere. All I want now is a solution that can give_\n\n_me just a bit of hope. The broker who smuggled me broke their promise. I would say to him, \u2018Look_\n\n_what you have done! Look where I have ended up now.\u2019\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n##### **RECOMMENDATIONS**\n\n\n_\u201cSince there is no peace, no life, no future; people will continue to jump into the sea.\u201d_\n\n[Rohingya refugee, 29 years old]\n\n\n\nIn response to the concerns outlined in this\n\nreport, South-East Asian states and other\n\nregional stakeholders should implement a\n\ncomprehensive long-term approach to manage\n\nmixed movements in the region. Specifically,\n\nUNHCR calls for:\n\n\n**Addressing push factors**\n\n\nAs long as the root causes of displacement\n\nremain unresolved, refugees will continue to be\n\ncompelled to undertake dangerous journeys in\n\nsearch of safety for them and their families.\n\n- Support improvement of conditions in\n\nrefugees\u2019 countries of origin to make it\n\npossible for refugees to return voluntarily\n\nin safety and dignity.\n\n- Enhance efforts to support refugee self\nreliance in countries of asylum to ensure\n\ndignity in their country of exile, help\n\nrefugees contribute to their host\n\ncommunities and prepare them for a future\n\nwhere they can re-establish their life\n\npermanently in their home country.\n\n- Increase solidarity and support for\n\ncountries along key migration routes to\n\nstrengthen access to protection where\n\nrefugees are located and thus reduce the\n\nneed for dangerous irregular journeys.\n\n\n\n**Access to safe and legal pathways**\n\n\n- Expand access to safe and legal migration\n\npathways by promoting educational\n\nopportunities (e.g. scholarship\n\nprogrammes), labour mobility schemes\n\nand family reunification visas for refugees.\n\n\n**Protection at sea**\n\n\nA coordinated and predictable regional\n\nresponse is required for rescue at sea, placing\n\nhuman life and dignity at its core in line with\n\nthe spirit of the 2016 Bali Declaration.\n\n- Support and actively engage the Bali\n\nProcess Task Force on Planning and\n\nPreparedness (TFPP) to promote\n\nresponsibility-sharing and support\n\nincreased search and rescue capacity,\n\npredictable disembarkation options, and\n\nmechanisms to identify those with\n\nprotection needs. Immediate priorities can\n\ninclude the establishment of a joint\n\ncontingency plan and standard operating\n\nprocedures to respond to mixed maritime\n\nmovements.\n\n- Strengthen the timely identification of\n\nvictims of trafficking, persons with medical\n\nneeds, and survivors of sexual and\n\ngender-based violence, including male and\n\nchild survivors, and ensure their referral to\n\nadequate multi-sectoral services.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 18\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Access to asylum**\n\n\n- Strengthen identification of those with\n\ninternational protection needs at borders\n\nand provide access to asylum procedures.\n\n- Interception measures at sea should not\n\nresult in asylum-seekers and refugees\n\nbeing denied access to international\n\nprotection or result in those in need of\n\ninternational protection being returned,\n\ndirectly or indirectly, to the frontiers of\n\nterritories where their life or freedom would\n\nbe threatened.\n\n\n\n2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n**Alternative to detention for the**\n**protection of children**\n\n\n  - End the detention of children for\n\nimmigration purposes, without undermining\n\nthe principle of family unity, and ensure\n\nearly identification of asylum-seeking\n\nunaccompanied and separated children\n\nand their integration within national child\n\nprotection systems.\n\n\n\nUNHCR / 2019 19\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2018 - JUNE 2019 REFUGEE MOVEMENTS IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/e64b01bb-1290-3fb3-b286-b376049ac549/5d91e2564.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_129/raw/doc_129_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,390 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2O2O-2025 Supporting protection and solutions\n\nSeptember 2019\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n#### Contents\n\n\nI. Introduction 3\n\nII. What we aim to achieve 4\n\nIII. Our Principles 6\n\nIV. Why invest now in data and information management? 8\n\nV. Defining UNHCR\u2019s role in data and information 10\n\nVI. Defining our approach 14\n\nVII. Priority Actions 16\n\n###### Acknowledgements\n\n\nThe UNHCR Data Transformation Strategy was developed in a collaborative\nprocess, based on essential inputs from the UNHCR High Commissioner, Senior\nExecutive team, UNHCR staff in Geneva, Copenhagen, the Regional Bureaux\nand many field offices, as well as partner organization staff and external\nconsultants. UNHCR would like to thank these individuals and groups for their\ntime and valuable input into this strategy and its subsequent execution. Without\ntheir support, this strategy would not have been possible.\n\nThis document is issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner\nfor Refugees for general distribution. All rights are reserved. Reproduction is\nauthorized, except for commercial purposes, provided UNHCR is acknowledged.\n\n\n~~CONTACT US~~\n\n**Ms. Sara Tholozan**\nCommunications Coordinator\nUNHCR Operational Data Service\n\nTel.: +45 45 33 6509\nEmail: [tholozan@unhcr.org](mailto:tholozan@unhcr.org)\n\n\n2 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n## I. Introduction\n\n**Data on forcibly displaced and stateless populations is critical to inform**\n**the international agenda and political debates on forced displacement**\n**and related issues, and to guide strategy development, policy-making**\n**and programming choices at the global, regional and national levels.**\n**Many humanitarian and development agencies recognize the importance**\n**of data on forcibly displaced populations and statelessness, and in the**\n**context of Agenda 2030, have made efforts to collect, collate and**\n**analyse such information.**\n\n\n\n**As the UN Agency with a responsibility to protect**\n**and assist asylum-seekers, refugees, internally**\n**displaced persons (IDPs), returnees and stateless**\n**people,** UNHCR has a vital role to play in generating\nand using information on forced displacement and\nstatelessness. Such information can save lives,\nsafeguard rights and well-being, and contribute to\nresilience and long-term solutions. With quality and\ntimely data, UNHCR and its partners can inspire\nconfidence and trust, take decisions informed by\nevidence, make resource allocations more effectively,\ninform communications and advocacy, and\ndemonstrate accountability.\n\n\n\nUNHCR currently generates and uses various types of\ndata and information on forced displacement and\nstatelessness situations, on affected populations, and\non its response. Increasingly, UNHCR\u2019s approach to\nstrengthen data and information systems is based on\ncollaboration, collective efforts and joint engagement\nwith partners and stakeholders, as the optimal way to\nboth ensure the effective use of resources and to\nachieve outcomes for those affected by forced\ndisplacement. UNHCR\u2019s data transformation strategy\npresents a vision, strategic priorities and key actions\nthat will be undertaken to enhance strategic and\nresponsible use of timely, quality data and information\nin line with this future approach.\n\n\n\n_Arua district in Northern Uganda near South Sudan 1 May, 2017. \u00a9 UNHCR/Jiro Ose_\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **WHAT WE AIM TO ACHIEVE**\n\n## II. What we aim to achieve\n\n\n**Our vision is that by 2025, UNHCR is a trusted leader on data and**\n**information related to refugees and other affected populations,**\n**thereby enabling actions that protect, include and empower.**\n\n\n_A Malian woman goes though the biometric screening procedure at a distribution centre in Mbera camp, part of the monthly food and cash_\n_distribution. \u00a9 UNHCR/Viola E. Bruttomesso_\n\n\n4 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**WHAT WE AIM TO ACHIEVE** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\n\nOur data strategy is geared\ntowards **connecting**\n**knowledge and learning**\n**across the organization. We**\n**balance the need for**\n**centralized data**\n**managemen** t standards,\nsystems, processes, and tools\nwith the requirement to\nenable innovation at the\nregional and local level and to\n**be responsive and adaptive**\n**to different needs.**\n\n\n\nOur data investments are\n**driven by our mission to**\n**protect and seek solutions**\n**for refugees and other**\n**forcibly displaced.** UNHCR\nmeasures and adapts its\ndata management and\naims to be accountable to\naffected populations,\ndonors, and other\nstakeholders.\n\n\n\nOur systems **leverage and**\n**adapt technology** in how\ndata is collected, shared,\nstored, analysed, protected\nand used. Recognising the\nvariation in operational\ncontexts, our systems will\nhave options and\nalternatives that **work in**\n**low-resource and low-**\n**technology settings.**\n\n\n\nOur data strategy will ensure\nwe are **outward-facing,**\n**collaborative and**\n**transparent. Our data**\n**ecosystem will communicate**\n**with and offer value to other**\n**systems** such as those\ndeveloped by governments,\nthe World Bank, partner\nplatforms, and UN agencies.\n\n\n\nOur data strategy will\nenable us to lead globally\n**on data protection,**\n**security and data ethics,**\nand will ensure that all\npersons of concern have\naccess to their data and\nother information to make\ndecisions about their lives.\n\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **OUR PRINCIPLES**\n\n## III. Our Principles\n\n\n_UNHCR staff member receives refugees on 7 May during a food distribution at South Sudan\u2019s Gorom refugee camp. \u00a9 UNHCR/Elizabeth Stuart_\n\n\n**UNHCR data and information activities will be guided by core principles**\nthat are applicable regardless of the type, context, or purpose. Anchored in\nthe overall imperative of \u201cDo no harm\u201d, these principles will ensure that our\nactivities are consistent with responsible and ethical approaches to data\nmanagement in humanitarian contexts.\n\n\n6 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**OUR PRINCIPLES** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\n###### People Centred\n\nUNHCR data and information activities will be guided\nby the interests and rights of the people we seek to\nserve and the communities around them. Activities\nwill be conducted in an objective, impartial and\ntransparent manner. Affected populations will be\nincluded and meaningfully engaged whenever\npossible, in accordance with our accountability and\ncommitment to them.\n###### Purpose and proportion\n\nUNHCR data and information activities will serve\nspecific information needs and defined purposes in\norder to avoid unnecessary burdens on and potential\nharm to both those who provide data and those who\nmanage it.\n\n\nThe purposes will be specific and clearly defined as\nwell as proportional to the expected benefits, risks\nand costs associated with protection and solutions.\n\n\n###### Data protection and security\n\nThe UN\u2019s Personal Data Protection and Privacy\nprinciples and UNHCR\u2019s Data Protection Policy inform\nall processing of personal data. Moreover, UNHCR\ndata and information activities will adhere to high\ninternational information and cybersecurity standards,\nincluding the concept of privacy, by design and by\ndefault.\n\n\n\n_UNHCR staff member uses an iris scanner on a refugee\u2019s eye to confirm identification at South Sudan\u2019s Gorom refugee camp._\n_\u00a9 UNHCR/Elizabeth Stuart_\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?**\n\n## IV. Why invest now in data and information management?\n\n\n\nThere are **eight** critical developments that will affect\nUNHCR\u2019s protection and delivery of assistance\nsignificantly in the coming 5 to 10 years. All require\nUNHCR, and others, to consider needs and\nopportunities for data and information differently in\nthe coming years.\n\n\nFirst, there is growing recognition that **the**\n**achievement of the UN Sustainable Development**\n**Goals is contingent on the extent to which those**\n**forcibly displaced are included and empowered in**\n**the coming years.** Two billion people live in countries\nwhere development outcomes are affected by\nfragility, conflict and violence. At the end of 2018, 70.8\nmillion people were forcibly displaced from their\nhomes; nearly 25.9 million were refugees. Reliable,\nup-to-date facts and figures about protection\ncontexts, vulnerabilities and needs will drive targeted\npolicies and actions.\n\n\nSecond, in this context, the Global Compact on\nRefugees guides the international community by\nmobilizing political will, broadening the support base\nand activating arrangements for more equitable and\npredictable burden- and responsibility-sharing. **Timely**\n**and accurate information on the indicators and**\n**measures of success of the global compact will be a**\n**critical element in ensuring such support.**\n\n\nThird, a data revolution is taking place around the\nworld, and many within the UN system see **data as a**\n**game-changer for informing policy and practice.**\n**UNHCR\u2019s contributions will generate better and**\n**more powerful data and evidence on the**\n\n\n\n**circumstances of forcibly displaced populations.**\nAchieving this role is dependent on boosting data\ncollection, management and analytical capacities.\n\n\nAs an example, the partnership with the World Bank\non the Joint Data Centre on Forced Displacement is a\nstep in the right direction. The Joint Data Centre aims\nto support collective, sustainable efforts to ensure\nthat socioeconomic data on forcibly displaced\npopulations are systematically collected, analysed,\nand made available to interested stakeholders\nthrough secure and open access. The Joint Data\nCentre will influence, complement and reinforce\nUNHCR\u2019s own data and information management\nsystems for better data and evidence.\n\n\nFourth, **global trends around the collection and use**\n**of personally identifiable information, biometrics**\n**and the emerging ethical issues** pose risks to\nUNHCR and most importantly, the individuals and\nfamilies that UNHCR serves. UNHCR has unique\nexperience with personal data, particularly of\nrefugees, and is well placed to leverage advances in\ntechnology to develop more sophisticated systems\nthat will protect identities and ensure the security and\nintegrity of personal data.\n\n\nFifth, **governments are seeking greater accountability**\n**and transparency on the impact, results, and**\n**appropriate and prudent use of humanitarian and**\n**development financing.** UNHCR\u2019s authority and\ninfluence rest heavily on its ability to show results and\nefficiencies, as well as gaps in implementation and\ncoverage. Better data will ensure ongoing support and\n\n\n\n8 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Global Compact on\nRefugees",
-          "confidence": 0.5424712896347046,
-          "start": 206,
-          "end": 210
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Global",
-          "confidence": 0.5465126633644104,
-          "start": 206,
-          "end": 207
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5421026349067688,
-          "start": 157,
-          "end": 158
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Joint Data Centre on Forced Displacement",
-          "confidence": 0.8743600845336914,
-          "start": 374,
-          "end": 380
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5499619245529175,
-          "start": 436,
-          "end": 437
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.7181268334388733,
-          "start": 455,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "forcibly displaced populations",
-          "confidence": 0.8820542097091675,
-          "start": 341,
-          "end": 344
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "personally identifiable information",
-          "confidence": 0.7884262204170227,
-          "start": 467,
-          "end": 470
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5535390973091125,
-          "start": 316,
-          "end": 317
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "global",
-          "confidence": 0.531238317489624,
-          "start": 455,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "individuals and\nfamilies",
-          "confidence": 0.6550790071487427,
-          "start": 492,
-          "end": 495
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\n\nfinance in line with Grand Bargain commitments.\nExternal benchmarking shows that others have already\nmade investments in many of these areas.\n\n\nSixth, the UN Secretary General has embarked on an\nambitious set of reforms to align the UN development\nsystem with the 2030 Agenda. **In particular, the**\n**Common Country Analysis, the Cooperation**\n**Framework and the Joint Workplan will require**\n**stronger partnerships for data and information, joint**\n**needs assessments, and shared platforms for**\n**reporting.**\n\n\nSeventh, UNHCR recently issued the Internally\nDisplaced Population Policy and Guidance Package\nto strengthen UNHCR\u2019s commitments to IDPs. The\npolicy outlines the data needs, systems and methods\nassociated with IDPs and describes how, in line with\nits role in managing evidence and information,\n**UNHCR aims to invest in data on internally and**\n**forcibly displaced populations.**\n\n\n\nEighth, the timeframe of this strategy encompasses the\nremaining years of the Global Action Plan to End\nStatelessness 2014\u22122024 (GAP). One of the key\nactions in the GAP is to **improve quantitative and**\n**qualitative data on stateless populations.** As\ngathering data continues to be a major challenge to\nresolving statelessness, stepping up efforts through\nthe analysis of civil registration data, population\ncensuses, targeted surveys and studies is key to\nreaching the GAP goal and will be pursued as part of\nthe strategy.\n\n\n\n_UNHCR staff member punches a card that records food distributions in South Sudan\u2019s Gorom refugee camp. \u00a9 UNHCR/Elizabeth Stuart_\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "civil registration data",
-          "confidence": 0.9816857576370239,
-          "start": 267,
-          "end": 270
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5167869925498962,
-          "start": 175,
-          "end": 176
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "stateless populations",
-          "confidence": 0.7199513912200928,
-          "start": 242,
-          "end": 244
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "population\ncensuses",
-          "confidence": 0.8384751081466675,
-          "start": 271,
-          "end": 273
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "card",
-          "confidence": 0.5078822374343872,
-          "start": 300,
-          "end": 301
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.626330554485321,
-          "start": 315,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "South Sudan\u2019s Gorom refugee camp",
-          "confidence": 0.6107318997383118,
-          "start": 306,
-          "end": 313
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?**\n\n## V. Defining UNHCR\u2019s role in data and information\n\n\n\nUNHCR works globally with refugees and asylum\nseekers, stateless persons, returnees and internally\ndisplaced persons. To protect and assist these\npopulation groups, UNHCR needs to access a\ncomplex range of different types of data and\ninformation:\n\n\n- The humanitarian situation and the wider\nenvironment (including social, economic, political,\nlegal and policy);\n\n- The people affected by the situation (notably\npopulation data about their number, location, and\nprofile, including specific vulnerabilities and\nneeds); and\n\n- Operational information on delivery of protection\nand assistance of a given response to the\nsituation.\n\n\nThese different types of data must be collected by\nUNHCR or by others, analysed, and presented in a\ntimely manner in order to manage resources, respond\neffectively, and advocate for affected populations.\nUNHCR and its partners already collect and use a\nsignficant amount of data, and there are currently\nsome systems to manage and analyse this\ninformation for decision-makers and staff at all levels.\nWhile these efforts have created a data-rich\nenvironment, there is room to improve how data is\nintegrated and pulled together, its quality and\nintegrity, and consistency and efficiency.\n\n\n\nIn the coming years, UNHCR aims to enhance and\ntransform its data and information management to\nbecome more effective at interrogating and analysing\na wider range of evidence for planning, monitoring,\nadvocacy, learning, course correction, reporting and\nexternal communications. Part of this ambition means\nrecognising where UNHCR needs to collect data\nitself, and where it can use data collected by others,\nhow and what data to share with others to help build\na common understanding of protection needs, risks\nand capacities of refugees and other affected\npopulations, and ultimately to demonstrate results.\n\n\n\n10 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\nData Sources\nUNHCR Uses\n\n**Government** **Partner** **UNHCR** **UN Agencies** **Open Data**\n\n\nOperational Data\nUNHCR Uses\n\n\n\n**Identity & Case** **Activity &** **Assessment &**\n**Management** **Results Data** **Sectoral**\n**Monitoring**\n\n\n\n**Demographic &**\n**Socioeconomic**\n**Data**\n\n\n\nAdminstrative Data\nUNHCR Uses\n\n**Finance** **Supply Chain** **HR**\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Operational Data",
-          "confidence": 0.5473243594169617,
-          "start": 48,
-          "end": 50
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5902513861656189,
-          "start": 19,
-          "end": 20
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?**\n\n\n\nUNHCR has several current and emerging assets in\ndata collection and analysis, which it can leverage in\nthis data transformation:\n\n\n**UNHCR\u2019s work on international protection and**\n**durable solutions for a wide range of population**\n**groups affected by humanitarian crises and**\n**stateless persons**\nUNHCR is obligated to report on the status and\nprotection conditions of refugees and stateless\npersons. We have also been responding to the needs\nof IDPs for many decades, notably as a result of the\nUN Humanitarian Reform (2005) and the Inter-Agency\nStanding Committee Transformative Agenda (2011).\n\n\n**Deep relationships and trust with refugees and**\n**other persons of concern**\nPersons of concern trust UNHCR to responsibly and\npurposefully manage personal and/or sensitive\ninformation concerning individual experiences and\nsituations. This provides UNHCR with legitimacy in\ninfluencing the international response from\ngovernments and the public.\n\n\n**Global impartial humanitarian agency and deep**\n**field presence**\nAs of August 2019, UNHCR was working in 130\ncountries across 478 locations involving 721 operations.\nOur humanitarian values and response capacity enable\nus to reach a variety of persons in different contexts.\nUNHCR can provide global, regional and country\nsituation analysis for more effective responses,\nparticularly in hard-to-reach areas.\n\n\n_1 UNHCR, Global Focus, http://reporting.unhcr.org/operations_\n\n\n\n**Close relationships with governments and other**\n**stakeholders**\nUNHCR has invested in building collaborative\nrelationships with governments, recognising and\nsupporting them as primary duty bearers. UNHCR will\ncontinue to strengthen these relationships which\nallow access to locations and delivery of assistance\nand services to persons of concern and to work with\ngovernments to improve the quality and availability of\ndata and information.\n\n\n**Experience with and access to identity management**\n**of forcibly displaced populations**\nUNHCR\u2019s experience with registration and broader\nidentity management enables us to understand\nvulnerabilities, target assistance and undertake case\nmanagement, a unique aspect of our work.\n\n\n\n12 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**WHY INVEST NOW IN DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGMENT?** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **DEFINING OUR APPROACH**\n\n## VI. Defining our approach\n\n\n\nAchieving the vision described above will require\nUNHCR to invest in data and information\nmanagement. The trends and shifts in context create\nan urgency to build a mature data and information\necosystem within UNHCR, for itself and other\nstakeholders; **status quo is not an option.** At the\nsame time, UNHCR is well-positioned to make these\ninvestments, yielding some quick results as well as\nlong-term benefits.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s approach to data transformation is\ndesigned to: **maximise the value of our data and**\n**information** by getting the best quality data that we\ncan, by focusing data collection on information that is\nuseful and useable, whether collected by us or\nothers, and by making the most of the data we have\nto inform policy and programming; **enhance data**\n**literacy** by making sure that our people have the\nknowledge and skills to use data responsibly and\neffectively; and **make a positive contribution** by\nusing and managing our data in planning and\nmonitoring our work for refugees and other affected\npopulations and communicating our results. The data\ntransformation is taking place concurrently with\nUNHCR\u2019s regionalization efforts and implementation\nof the strategy reflects this new structure.\n\n\nMore specifically, UNHCR will make investments to\nadapt to the evolving data landscape. The data\ntransformation strategy outlines that current data\nmanagement systems will be more inter-operable;\nthat a corporate data governance framework will be\nestablished to provide secure processes for data\nsharing and transfer; and to support better use of\nqualitative, quantitative and participatory data\nthroughout the programme cycle.\n\n\n\nUNHCR also must ensure that individuals and\ncommunities have the data and information needed\nto enhance their own protection, meet their own\nneeds and identify their own solutions. The fastchanging digital identity landscape calls for new\nframeworks that facilitate the flow and use of data\nwhile also ensuring the right to privacy and data\nprotection.\n\n\n**How the data strategy links with UNHCR\u2019s**\n**Results-Based Management (RBM) System**\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s RBM system, Results Framework,\nprocesses and associated indicators are currently\nbeing redesigned. The new framework will establish\na limited set of core outcome and impact indicators\nthat enable aggregated global analysis and reporting.\n\n\nThe new structure will also enable linkages to SDGs\nwhere appropriate. Furthermore, there will be\nflexibility at the country operation level to enable for\ncontext specificity and linkages with UN-wide efforts\nas relevant. Finally, sectors will provide guidance on\nbest practices in indicator selection and use to\ncountry operations.\n\n\nProviding norms, standards and policies that guide\nhow data is collected, stored, protected and shared\nagainst these core indicators is part and parcel of\nthe data strategy.\n\n\nThe RBM team and the HQ data service will work\nclosely to develop and disseminate guidance and\ntools on data collection and systems for storage and\nsharing in collaboration with technical teams at\nbureaux/headquarters for use by regional data\nplatforms and country operations.\n\n\n\n14 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**DEFINING OUR APPROACH** DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nU N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 **PRIORITY ACTIONS**\n\n## VII. Priority Actions\n\n\n**UNHCR will invest in four complementary priority areas** that will be\nimplemented across the organization in the coming five years in a\nsequenced manner to achieve the vision and strategic outcomes.\n\n\n###### A. Investing in Data Management and Governance\n\nEffective data management in UNHCR will only be\npossible through adherence to norms and policies,\ndisciplined data management and sound data and\ninformation sharing practices.\n\n\nRules, norms and practices to govern and align\nUNHCR\u2019s data and information systems are crucial to\nensure that headquarters, regional and country data\nsystems are effective, consistent and systematic, and\nare prerequisites for global aggregation.\n\n###### B. Investments in Information Systems\n\nBased on a corporate set of norms and standards for\ndata management and a data governance structure,\ninvestments in information systems and processes\nthat enable UNHCR to efficiently and systematically\ncapture, use, share and highlight quality data at all\nlevels will need to be enhanced.\n\n\nThese investments should be made leveraging the\ntechnology and data trends to ensure data protection\nand security, data quality and consistency, as well as\ninter-operability and mutual data transfer with external\nsystems. Some investments that are unique to\nrefugee and stateless populations are needed, while\nothers will be unique to IDP situations.\n\n\n###### C. Investing in Capacities\n\nCapacity investments include recruitment of new and\nadditional expertise in the area of data science and\nanalytics; reskilling of existing staff working on data\nand information; and general capacity-building among\nall managers on data interpretation and use.\n###### D. Investing in Culture\n\nCulture is the hardest one to evolve, as it requires\nstaff to become familiar with using data in their\nday-to-day work for partner management, decisionmaking, communication and planning.\n\n\nOne example of introducing a change in culture is the\nuse of data-informed decision-making by senior\nmanagement in formal communications and staff\nmeetings. Senior managers can also set expectations\nfor staff to present data on a regular basis that helps\nto inform operational performance tracking, planning\nand targeting of assistance.\n\n\n\n16 U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "U N H C R / 1 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 9 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### DATA TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY 2020-2025 Supporting protection and solutions\n\n##### September 2019\n\nwww.unhcr.org\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a93f3623-ab55-3c8d-9e2d-142b85e41d33/5dc2e4734.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_13/raw/doc_13_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,72 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **NOTE DE PLAIDOYER** UN BESOIN CRUCIAL DE RENFORCEMENT DES ACTIONS CONTRE LA MENACE CROISSANTE DES ENGINS EXPLOSIFS (EE) AU NIGER\n\n\u2018\u2018L\u2019acc\u00e8s aux populations dans le besoin au Niger s\u2019av\u00e8re plus que n\u00e9cessaire pour l\u2019ensemble des\nacteurs afin de soulager les souffrances de ces populations. Cependant, l\u2019utilisation de plus en plus\nnombreuse des engins explosifs s\u2019amplifie de jour en jour, rendent difficile l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux populations et\ncontinue de grossir le nombre de morts et de bless\u00e9s. Une attention particuli\u00e8re doit \u00eatre port\u00e9e\nvers les incidents li\u00e9s aux engins explosifs \u2019\u2019\n\n\n_Juillet 2023_\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**I.** **Contexte**\nLe Niger est marqu\u00e9 par une situation humanitaire caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e par les attaques des groupes arm\u00e9s\nnon \u00e9tatiques (GANE) dans le Liptako Gourma et dans le bassin du lac Tchad ayant provoqu\u00e9 le\nd\u00e9placement forc\u00e9 d\u2019environ 700 000 personnes [1] dont 400,000 personnes d\u00e9plac\u00e9es internes (PDI) [2],\n251 760 r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s et 50,377 retourn\u00e9s. Malgr\u00e9 les efforts d\u00e9ploy\u00e9s par l\u2019Etat et ses partenaires, la\nsituation s\u00e9curitaire reste pr\u00e9occupante dans certaines localit\u00e9s des r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry, Tahoua, Diffa\net Maradi. En 2022, environ de 3,821 incidents de protection ont \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s dans ces 4 r\u00e9gions et\nont affect\u00e9es 18,408 personnes. Au cours du 1 [er] semestre de 2023, la situation de protection ne s\u2019est\npas am\u00e9lior\u00e9e en d\u00e9pit d\u2019une accalmie constat\u00e9e dans certaines r\u00e9gions. Plus de 1,800 incidents de\nprotection ont \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9s de janvier \u00e0 juin 2023 (en moyenne 955 incidents par trimestre en 2022\ncontre 934 courant 2023). Il est \u00e0 d\u00e9plorer la poursuite des exactions par les GANE y compris les vols\net extorsion de biens, les agressions physiques, les enl\u00e8vements de personnes, les assassinats, les\nviolences sexuelles mais \u00e9galement des incidents li\u00e9s aux engins explosifs (EE). La situation s\u00e9curitaire\net les op\u00e9rations militaires dans les pays voisins (Mali, Burkina Faso, Nigeria), la poursuite des\nincursions des GANE au Niger, l\u2019intensification des interventions des Forces de d\u00e9fense et de s\u00e9curit\u00e9\n(FDS) sont autant des facteurs qui laissent pr\u00e9sager la persistance des menaces des EE au Niger.\n\nEn effet, depuis 2022, la menace des engins explosifs n\u2019a cess\u00e9 de s\u00e9vir dans les r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry et\nDiffa. Le Cluster Protection a enregistr\u00e9 environ 55 incidents li\u00e9s aux EE en 2022 (soit une\naugmentation de 34% compar\u00e9 \u00e0 2021). De janvier \u00e0 juin 2023, 32 incidents EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9 rapport\u00e9s\nrepr\u00e9sentant plus de la moiti\u00e9 du nombre total des incidents rapport\u00e9s en 2022. Il convient aussi de\nsouligner la probl\u00e9matique de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire qui affecte plusieurs d\u00e9partements y compris\nceux touch\u00e9s par les menaces des EE. En effet, face aux effets de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire les\ncommunaut\u00e9s pourraient recourir \u00e0 des strat\u00e9gies de survie n\u00e9gative notamment celle de s\u2019aventurer\ndans des zones affect\u00e9es par les EE \u00e0 la recherche de moyens de subsistance voire de r\u00e9colter de la\nferraille trouvable sur des restes explosifs de guerre pour la revendre.\nFace \u00e0 cette menace croissante des EE, les capacit\u00e9s d\u2019actions de lutte anti-mines restent limit\u00e9es au\nNiger. Des d\u00e9fis consid\u00e9rables existent tant dans les actions programmatiques que dans la coordination\ndes interventions. Aucun m\u00e9canisme de coordination de lutte anti-mines n\u2019est fonctionnel ni au niveau\nnational ni dans les r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es par les EE. Cela rend difficile l\u2019harmonisation, le ciblage et la\npriorisation strat\u00e9giques des interventions LAM. L\u2019objectif de cette note est de renforcer le plaidoyer\naupr\u00e8s des autorit\u00e9s \u00e9tatiques, les diff\u00e9rents partenaires techniques et financiers afin de soutenir les\nactions de lutte anti-mines au Niger, prot\u00e9ger les communaut\u00e9s et les acteurs humanitaires contre les\nrisques li\u00e9s aux EE et leur permettre de jouir davantage de leurs droits et libert\u00e9s fondamentaux.\n\n## **II. Analyse de l\u2019\u00e9volution des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE et leur impact**\n\nDu dernier trimestre 2022 au 2eme trimestre de 2023, 56 incidents [3] EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9 rapport\u00e9s\nprincipalement dans les r\u00e9gions de Tillab\u00e9ry et Diffa [4] . Compar\u00e9 au 1er trimestre 2023, on peut noter\nque le nombre d\u2019incidents EE a doubl\u00e9 au 2eme trimestre de 2023, ce qui traduit une augmentation\npr\u00e9occupante de la menace des EE au Niger .\n\n\n1 UNHCR Niger montlhy PoC statistics, Juin 2023\n2 Statistiques de Mouvement de population, minist\u00e8re de l\u2019Action Humanitaire et Gestion de catastrophes,\njuillet 2023\n3 Source : Commission Nationale pour la Collecte et le Contr\u00f4le des Armes Illicites (CNCCAI)\n4 Voir aussi le Briefing INSO et Pr\u00e9sentation CM CMCOORD, juin 2023\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Cette menace affecte davantage les civils que les\nmilitaires surtout au 2eme trimestre de 2023 ( **R\u00e9f**\n**fig3** ). En effet, les incidents EE rapport\u00e9s on fait au\ntotal 132 victimes [5] et survivants dont plus de la\nmajorit\u00e9 (52%) sont des personnes civiles (tu\u00e9s ou\n### bless\u00e9s). Le pourcentage des civils tu\u00e9s est presque le double de celui des militaires tu\u00e9s, ce qui fait peser la menace davantage sur les civiles que les militaires et traduit la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de\n\nrenforcer les actions de lutte anti-mines au sein des\ncommunaut\u00e9s.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLes r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es sont celles de Tillab\u00e9ry (zones\ndes 3 fronti\u00e8res dans le Sahel) et de Diffa (r\u00e9gion du\n\nd\u00e9partements [6] affect\u00e9s, et la r\u00e9gion de Diffa en\ncompte 4 . Un nombre minime d\u2019incident EE ont \u00e9t\u00e9\naussi rapport\u00e9e dans 3 autres r\u00e9gions : Agadez, Dosso\net Niamey (R **\u00e9f Fig2** ). Cette situation met \u00e0 risque plus\nde 200,000 personnes vivant dans les zones affect\u00e9es par les EE.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLa pr\u00e9valence des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE entra\u00eene \u00e9galement des restrictions sur la mobilit\u00e9 des\npopulations civiles sur les axes routiers vers les march\u00e9s hebdomadaires, et les chefs-lieux des\n\n\n\n\n\ncommunes/d\u00e9partements.\nEnviron 36% des personnes\ninterview\u00e9es [7] disent rencontrer\ndes difficult\u00e9s de mobilit\u00e9 du fait\ndes activit\u00e9s des GANE et des\nop\u00e9rations militaires. Cet\nindicateur varie d\u2019une r\u00e9gion \u00e0 une\nautre. Dans les r\u00e9gions de Diffa et\nTillab\u00e9ry, 56% des personnes\ninterrog\u00e9es d\u00e9clarent rencontrer\ndes restrictions de mobilit\u00e9 dont\nl\u2019une des principales raisons \u00e9tant\nla pr\u00e9sence des EE **.** Cela limite\nconsid\u00e9rablement le ravitaillement\np\u00e9riodique des m\u00e9nages en\nmoyens de subsistances et biens\n\n\n\n5 Commission Nationale pour la Collecte et le Contr\u00f4le des Armes Illicites (CNCCAI). La d\u00e9sagr\u00e9gation par sexe\net \u00e2ge des donn\u00e9es 2023 pour les victimes n\u2019est pas encore disponible. Cependant selon le Sous cluster Protection\nde l\u2019Enfance, le Groupe de travail Protection de l\u2019Enfance de la r\u00e9gion de Diffa a consolid\u00e9 18 enfants victimes\ndes EE en 2022 dont la majorit\u00e9 (74%) sont des filles qui allaient chercher le bois de chauffe.\n6 Il s\u2019agit des d\u00e9partements de: Torodi, Say,T\u00e9ra, Tillab\u00e9ry, Gotheye, Bankilar\u00e9 et, Ouallam (r\u00e9gion de Tillab\u00e9ry)\net Diffa, Bosso, Main\u00e9 et N'Guingmi (region de Diffa)\n7 Selon les donn\u00e9es du monitoring de protection (P21) au premier semestre 2023\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "de premi\u00e8re n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 en plus de la peur et psychose que la pr\u00e9sence impr\u00e9visible des EE installe au\nsein des communaut\u00e9s.\n\n\nIl est important de noter aussi que sur les 11 d\u00e9partements affect\u00e9s dans les r\u00e9gions de Diffa et\n### Tillab\u00e9ry, 9 (82%) sont aussi touch\u00e9es par la crise de l\u2019ins\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire [8] . Ceci pourrait\n\nexacerber les besoins des communaut\u00e9s \u00e0 intensifier leur strat\u00e9gie de survie y compris des activit\u00e9s \u00e0\nla recherche de moyens de subsistance pouvant les exposer aux risques d\u2019EE. L\u2019application des\n[sanctions](https://ecowas.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/COMMUNIQUE-FINAL-CINQUANTE-ET-UNIEME-SOMMET-EXTRAORDINAIRE-DE-LA-CONFERENCE-DES-CHEFS-DETAT-ET-DE-GOUVERNEMENT-DE-LA-CEDEAO-SUR-LA-SITUATION-POLITIQUE-AU-NIGER.pdf) en cours suite au coup d\u2019\u00e9tat au Niger pourrait augmenter le cout de la vie et accroitre les\nbesoins vitaux des populations d\u00e9j\u00e0 vuln\u00e9rables. Cette situation nouvelle les exposerait \u00e0 des risques\nd\u2019enr\u00f4lement aux GANE moyennant une solde et par cons\u00e9quent augmentera la capacite des GANE\ndans la pose des EE. De surcroit, la population pourrait intensifier leurs strat\u00e9gies de survie en\ns\u2019adonnant \u00e0 plusieurs types d\u2019activit\u00e9s pour s\u2019adapter \u00e0 la chert\u00e9 du cout de la vie y compris la\nrecherche de subsistance dans des zones potentiellement affect\u00e9es par les EE. On pourra ainsi assister\n\u00e0 une recrudescence des incidents des EE.\n\n## **III. D\u00e9fis majeurs dans les interventions en lutte anti-mines (LAM)**\n\n\n\nFig4. Cartographie des interventions LAM, 30 juin 2023\n\n\n\nEn janvier 2023, le\nCluster Protection a\nlanc\u00e9 une initiative\nconjointe de la\ncartographie des\ninterventions de\nprotection y compris les\nactions de lutte antimine. L\u2019analyse des\ndonn\u00e9es issues de cette\ncartographie coupl\u00e9e \u00e0\nl\u2019analyse des donn\u00e9es\ndes r\u00e9alisations des\nacteurs de protection\nont fait ressortir le\nconstat ci-dessous :\n\n\n\n\n                                       - Seuls deux acteurs de\nprotection ont des\ninterventions en LAM qui ne couvrent que quelques localit\u00e9s des 7 d\u00e9partements sur 11\nd\u00e9partements affect\u00e9es par les EE ( **R\u00e9f Fig4 & Fig2)** ). 4 sur 11 d\u00e9partements les plus touch\u00e9es\npar les EE restent sans aucune intervention LAM.\n\n  - On note un **gap majeur dans les interventions d\u2019Education aux risques d\u2019Engins Explosifs**\n(EREE) dans plusieurs r\u00e9gions affect\u00e9es par les EE (Diffa, Tillab\u00e9ry, Dosso, Agadez et Niamey).\n\n  - Un manque crucial des actions d\u2019assistance aux victimes est observ\u00e9 dans tous les 11\nd\u00e9partements affect\u00e9s ( **R\u00e9f Fig5** ).\n\n\n8 [Situation S\u00e9curit\u00e9 alimentaire, juin 2023](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVzLNdVSeHdrZ0iNx0YUf2LNiWuO5gBS/view?usp=sharing)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "  - Les capacit\u00e9s\nexistantes n\u2019ont\npermis d\u2019atteindre\nqu\u2019environ 3,000\npersonnes [9] avec les\nactivit\u00e9s d\u2019EREE,\nrepr\u00e9sentant\nseulement 2% de la\n[cible du plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP.](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023) **98% de la cible HRP LAM n\u2019est donc pas atteinte** .\nPar ailleurs, 77% du financement requis pour les interventions LAM n\u2019est pas acquis.\n\n  - Il existe \u00e9galement **une absence de ressources humaines d\u00e9di\u00e9es \u00e0 la coordination au niveau**\n**national et r\u00e9gional**, la pr\u00e9vention et l\u2019assistance aux victimes. Le Sous-Cluster LAM ne\nfonctionne plus depuis le retrait de UNMAS d\u00e9but novembre 2022, malgr\u00e9 des efforts de\ncoordination conjointe entre la CNCCAI et les op\u00e9rateurs de LAM dont Mines Advisory Group\n(MAG) et Humanit\u00e9 et Inclusion (HI)\n\n  - **Un besoin consid\u00e9rable de renforcement de capacit\u00e9s en LAM** pour les diff\u00e9rents acteurs y\ncompris les acteurs humanitaires de premi\u00e8re ligne, les comit\u00e9s LAM est urgemment\nn\u00e9cessaire.\n\n## **IV. Recommandations majeures**\n\nAvec la menace croissante des EE, la faible couverture g\u00e9ographique et la faible diversit\u00e9 des\ninterventions LAM, plus de 200,000 personnes vivant dans les zones impact\u00e9es par les EE restent sans\nassistance et expos\u00e9es \u00e0 un risque accru d\u2019\u00eatre victimes des EE. Il est crucial d\u2019investir davantage dans\nles actions de lutte anti-mines afin de s\u2019assurer que les communaut\u00e9s b\u00e9n\u00e9ficient d\u2019une \u00e9ducation aux\nrisques li\u00e9s aux EE adapt\u00e9e au genre et \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e2ge. Cela permettrait \u00e9galement aux communaut\u00e9s\nd\u2019adopter un comportement s\u00fbr, et d\u2019acc\u00e9der aux services de prise en charge inclusifs pour les victimes\net survivants des EE. Par cons\u00e9quent, il est primordial de renforcer les aspects suivants :\n\n\n1. Plaidoyer : Renforcer le plaidoyer aupr\u00e8s des diff\u00e9rents d\u00e9cideurs (autorit\u00e9s \u00e9tatiques,\n\npartenaires techniques et financiers) pour le retour de UNMAS au Niger\n\n2. Coordination : Identifier des partenaires techniques additionnels pouvant appuyer la\n\ncoordination des interventions LAM au niveau national et r\u00e9gional (Tillab\u00e9ry et Diffa)\n\n3. Mobilisation de ressources : En 2023 environ 77% du financement requis pour les\n\ninterventions LAM n\u2019est pas acquis. Il est capital de mobiliser un montant de 2,000,000 USD [10]\npouvant permettre la mise \u00e0 \u00e9chelle de la coordination LAM, la collecte des donn\u00e9es par la\nCNCCAI d\u00e9sagr\u00e9g\u00e9es par genre et \u00e2ge, les interventions d\u2019Education aux risques des Engins\nExplosifs (EREE), l\u2019assistance aux victimes, le d\u00e9minage et le renforcement de capacit\u00e9s LAM.\n\n4. Collaboration : Renforcer la collaboration avec les diff\u00e9rents acteurs pour avoir une\n\ncartographie des zones affect\u00e9es par les EE afin d\u2019intensifier les s\u00e9ances de formation, la\nsensibilisation tant aupr\u00e8s des communaut\u00e9s que des acteurs humanitaires\n\n\n9 Dashboard des r\u00e9alisations de protection, cluster Protection, Avril 2023\n10 [plan de reponse humanitaire/HRP 2023-2025, Niger](https://reliefweb.int/report/niger/niger-plan-de-reponse-humanitaire-mars-2023)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Annexe 1 :** Quelques exemples d\u2019incidents li\u00e9s aux EE _(Sources : Monitoring de protection, CNCCAI,_\n_INSO)_\n\n\n      - _**20/03/23 :**_ _aux environs de 08h le v\u00e9hicule d\u2019une autorit\u00e9 aurait saut\u00e9 sur un engin explosif_\n_improvis\u00e9 au niveau de Bougoum, axe Torodi-Niamey (r\u00e9gion Tillab\u00e9ry)_\n\n\n      - _**25/05/23 :**_ _EE \u00e0 Ngouba au passage de bergers. 3 morts et des vaches tu\u00e9es (r\u00e9gion de Diffa)_\n\n\n      - _**16/06/23**_ _: EE contre un v\u00e9hicule FDS \u00e0 Chetima Wango. 7 morts / 4 bless\u00e9s (r\u00e9gion Diffa)_\n\n\n      - _**6/06/23 :**_ _un reste explosif de guerre (REG) a explos\u00e9 contre 03 enfants dans le village de Agali_\n_(d\u00e9partement/commune de Dosso). Les victimes qui \u00e9taient \u00e0 la recherche des ferrailles ont_\n_vraisemblablement confondu l\u2019engin \u00e0 un morceau de fer qu\u2019ils ont tap\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019aide d\u2019un marteau._\n_L\u2019explosion a occasionn\u00e9 la mort d\u2019un enfant et 02 bless\u00e9s. Il est \u00e0 noter que l'Antenne r\u00e9gionale_\n_de la CNCCAI cens\u00e9e coordonner les activit\u00e9s EREE au niveau r\u00e9gional n'existe pas \u00e0 Dosso_\n_faute des moyens_\n\n\n      - _**4/07/2023 :**_ _aux environs de 09h, un Engin Explosif Improvis\u00e9 (EEI) aurait explos\u00e9 au passage_\n_d\u2019un v\u00e9hicule des \u00e9l\u00e9ments des FDS de l\u2019op\u00e9ration Niyya, qui patrouillaient sur l\u2019axe Torodi-_\n_Makalondi, non-loin du village de Niaktir\u00e9 (r\u00e9gion Tillab\u00e9ry)_\n\n\n**Annexe 2 :** T\u00e9moignages d\u2019une victime des incidents li\u00e9s aux EE\n\n\n**Histoire d\u2019un homme \u00e2g\u00e9 de 45 ans, victime des engins explosifs, commune de Toumour/r\u00e9gion de Diffa**\n\n\n_Je me souviens de ce dimanche 7 mai 2023, jour du march\u00e9 de Toumour. On s\u2019\u00e9tait entendu avec le d\u00e9funt M. XX pour_\n_aller se ravitailler en vivre. Le matin de bonne heure nous avons emprunt\u00e9 la route. M. XX \u00e9tait devant avec en sa_\n_possession une vache qu\u2019il avait l\u2019intention de vendre. Il \u00e9tait devant moi vu que, la b\u00eate n\u2019arr\u00eatait pas de courir. Entre_\n_nous il y avait environ 20 m\u00e8tre. \u00c0 approximativement 2 kilom\u00e8tres de la commune de Toumour nous avons entendu une_\n_forte d\u00e9tonation insupportable. Je me suis \u00e9vanoui me r\u00e9veillant que quelques heures apr\u00e8s au centre de sante de_\n_Toumour. Je n\u2019avais m\u00eame pas connaissance de comment on m\u2019avait transport\u00e9 l\u00e0-bas. J\u2019\u00e9tais \u00e0 moiti\u00e9 sourd. C\u2019est \u00e0_\n_ce moment-l\u00e0 qu\u2019on m\u2019a racont\u00e9 que, M. XX est mort ainsi que la vache. J\u2019ai appris que c\u2019est lui qui a march\u00e9 sur_\n_l\u2019engin explosif. C\u2019\u00e9tait vraiment terrifiant. Il y\u2019avait du sang qui coulait un peu partout sur mon corps \u00e0 cause de_\n_l\u2019explosion. J\u2019ai eu peur, mais les infirmi\u00e8res m\u2019ont fait comprendre que, ce n\u2019\u00e9tait pas grave._\n\n\n_J\u2019ai \u00e9t\u00e9 pris en charge au CSI Toumour. Mais apr\u00e8s j\u2019ai appris que, ma famille a pay\u00e9 de l\u2019argent pour mon traitement._\n_J\u2019ai surmont\u00e9 mon traumatisme tout seul. Cependant, je reconnais que, les agents de sant\u00e9 m\u2019ont bien trait\u00e9 et ont essay\u00e9_\n_de me remonter le moral. Du d\u00e9but jusqu\u2019\u00e0 aujourd\u2019hui, j\u2019ai fait des efforts pour oublier ce d\u00e9sastre. Mais ce n\u2019est pas_\n_facile. Je ne peux pas cesser de penser au d\u00e9funt M. XX. En plus, aujourd\u2019hui, je suis \u00e0 moiti\u00e9 sourd car je n\u2019ai qu\u2019une_\n_seule oreille fonctionnelle. J\u2019ai besoin d\u2019une consultation pour retrouver l\u2019audition compl\u00e8te._\n\n\n_Mes voisins viennent r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement pour essayer de m\u2019encourager et m\u2019aider \u00e0 tenir le coup. Et aujourd\u2019hui_\n_alhamdulillah, tout est rentr\u00e9 dans l\u2019ordre \u00e0 part le handicap auditif l\u00e9ger qui me d\u00e9range. Nous n\u2019avons pas re\u00e7u des_\n_sensibilisations sur les EE. Peut-\u00eatre, cela est d\u00fb au fait qu\u2019on vivait un peu \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9cart de Toumour. Actuellement j\u2019ai_\n_peur car dans des situations pareilles ni ma famille ni notre troupeau n\u2019est \u00e0 l\u2019abri. Tout le monde est expos\u00e9. Surtout_\n_nous les nomades qui sont en d\u00e9placement permanent._\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Cette note de plaidoyer \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9labor\u00e9e avec la contribution de plusieurs acteurs y\n\ncompris :\n\n\n**PROCAP Niger**,\n\n\n**Regional Protection**\n\n**Cluster (WCARO)**\n\n### **POUR PLUS D\u2019INFORMATION, VEUILLEZ CONTACTER**\n\n\n**Aliou MAIGA,** Coordinateur Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\n**Email :** [maiga@unhcr.org](mailto:maiga@unhcr.org)\n\n\n**Zabeirou Alfazazi**, Co Coordinateur du Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\nEmail : alfazazizabeirou@gmail.com\n\n\n**Daniel Thiombiano**, Co facilitateur du Cluster Protection au Niger\n\n\n**Email** :daniel.thiombiano@drc.ngo\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/246cc207-af41-430c-9600-6cdbb5448cbf/1.%20Note%20plaidoyer%20Lutte%20AntiMines%20-%20Niger_FR.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_130/raw/doc_130_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,288 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **UNHCR\u2019s Approach** **to Age, Gender and** **Diversity**\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## **Introduction**\n\nThe United Nations High Commissioner for\nRefugees (UNHCR) safeguards the rights and\nwell-being of people who have been forced\nto flee, including refugees, asylum-seekers,\ninternally displaced persons, returnees,\nstateless persons and those at risk of\nstatelessness. UNHCR recognises that each\nperson of concern has differing capacities and\npriorities and faces different protection risks.\nThese protection risks may be heightened as\na result of specific age, gender and diversity\ncharacteristics, and the intersection between\nthose characteristics.\n\n\nTo help alleviate these risks and ensure\nassistance and services are accessible to\nall persons of concern and appropriately\nrespond to each person\u2019s priorities and\nneeds, it is critical to understand first their\nrespective experiences and perspectives. This\nshould be done by consulting with persons\nof concern regularly and engaging them in\ndecision-making that affects their lives, and\nleverages their diverse capacities to lead\npositive change in their communities.\n\n\nTo achieve this, UNHCR engages persons\nof concern through an age, gender and\ndiversity (AGD) approach. The AGD approach\nrecognises individuals as unique in their\nneeds, capacities and priorities, promotes\nopportunities to participate in decisions,\nand ensures access to rights for all without\ndiscrimination based on their age, gender,\ndisability, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation,\ngender identity, and other characteristics that\nshape their identities.\n\n\nFor many years, UNHCR field teams have\nused participatory methodologies to promote\nthe role of women, men, girls, and boys of all\nages and backgrounds as agents of change in\ntheir families and communities. UNHCR issued\nkey policies and tools such as the 2006 Tool\nfor Participatory Assessment in Operations,\nthe 2008 Manual on a Community-Based\nApproach in UNHCR Operations, and the 2011\nAge, Gender and Diversity Policy. UNHCR also\norganized global consultations with women\nand youth, to better incorporate their views\ninto the development of policies and tools.\n\n\n\nApplying an AGD approach requires that we\nconsider how age and gender intersect with\nother characteristics (e.g. disability, sexual\norientation and/or gender identity, religion,\nethnicity, income level, education) and\nhow such intersections may lend to more\ncomplex protection risks. It is essential that\nprogrammes and initiatives systematically\nengage a diverse range of persons of\nconcern and address the specific needs of\nthose who are disadvantaged, recognizing\n\n- for example \u2013 that a LGBTI woman or\ngirl, a child with disability, an older woman,\na marginalized or indigenous person with\ndisability, etc. will have a vastly different\n\n\n\nCover photo: Philippines. UNHCR helps community at risk of statelessness. \u00a9UNHCR/Roger Arnold\n\n\n2 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "experience from others and, thus, will face\ndistinct risks and may have additional needs\nthat require specific attention.\n\n\nFor example in Costa Rica, although children\nin most displacement contexts were found to\nexperience limited access to education and\nearly pregnancy, these risks were amplified\nfor indigenous and LGBTI children. As this\nexample illustrates, it is essential to identify\nand examine critically the challenges faced\nby persons of concern and, then, to look\ndeeper to identify when these challenges\nmay be elevated as a result of one or more\ncoinciding risk factors.\n\n\n\nthese commitments and increase accountability to\npersons of concern.\n\n\nThe updated AGD policy (2018) strengthens\norganizational accountability to all persons of concern,\nclearly defining specific responsibilities across senior\nmanagement and entities within UNHCR and calling\nfor consistent monitoring that leads to evidence-based\nregular reporting. The policy is an organization-wide\nengagement, mandatory for all UNHCR operations\nand has expanded its reach, ensuring applicability to\nall persons of concern to UNHCR: refugees, asylumseekers, IDPs, returnees, stateless persons, and those\nat risk of statelessness.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "4 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### APPLYING AN AGE, GENDER AND DIVERSITY APPROACH AT UNHCR\n## **I. AGD inclusive programming:**\n\n\n\nThrough more clearly defined data, UNHCR\ncan obtain a comprehensive understanding of\nthe populations it serves and, in particular, the\nunique protection risks faced by the women,\nmen, girls and boys of concern to UNHCR,\nas well as their respective capacities and\nneeds. Having this data and understanding\nenables UNHCR to ensure that programming\nappropriately utilizes the capacities and skills\nof persons of concern and also responds to\nthe needs and protection risks identified.\n\n### Achievements:\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Most UNHCR operations collect data\ndisaggregated by age and sex for both\nanalysis and programming purposes. As a\nresult, operations are able to account for\nthe differing needs of persons of concern\nwith respect to their age and sex.\n\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s AGD policy requires that at a\nminimum, all data collected by UNHCR\nwill be disaggregated by age and sex\nand by other diversity considerations,\nas contextually appropriate and\npossible, for purposes of analysis and\nprogramming.\n\nAGD policy 2018 \u2013 core action 1\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Some UNHCR operations are\ndisaggregating data by disability, lending\nto potential for improved accessibility\nto UNHCR offices, programmes and\nservices.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** UNHCR operations regularly target\nprogramming to meet the needs of\nwomen and girls, children and youth.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "In **Venezuela**, UNHCR initiated profiling and\nregistration exercises which provide for data\ncollected by UNHCR to be disaggregated\nby age, sex and diversity considerations, as\ncontextually appropriate and possible, for\npurposes of analysis and programming.\n\n\n**Lebanon:** An annual vulnerability\nassessment provides data disaggregated\nby district, governorate, gender of the\nhead of household, shelter type, food\nsecurity and economic vulnerability, offering\na deeper understanding of the Syrian\nrefugee population and enabling UNHCR\nand its partners to adapt programming.\nFor example, by disaggregating data, the\nassessment revealed a gender distinction in\nfood-related coping strategies. Gender and\nage disaggregation also provided important\ninformation on the reasons for school\ndropout: work was an overriding reason\ncited by out-of-school males; and, marriage\nwas the most common reason cited by\nfemales.\n\n\n**Europe:** Together with UNICEF and IOM,\nUNHCR collected and disaggregated data on\nrefugee and migrant children who arrived in\nEurope in 2018, providing a synopsis of data\nbroken down by age, gender, nationality,\nstatus (unaccompanied, separated), country\nof arrival, country of registration, and\nresettlement status. This information helps\nsupport decision-making and advocacy\non issues related to refugee and migrant\nchildren.\n### Challenges:\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** The collection of data by disability is\noften challenged by limited capacity\nto identify persons with disabilities.\nSimilarly, LGBTI persons, minorities\nand indigenous persons, and others\nat heightened risk remain unknown to\nUNHCR due to limited capacity to reach\nout to, and collect data on, the most\nmarginalized and less visible groups.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Even though data is typically\ndisaggregated by age, the collection\nof data by differing age groups is\nsometimes lacking, resulting in certain\npopulations (e.g. youth) and their needs\ngoing unidentified and, thus, overlooked.\n\n\n\n\n\n6 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "profiling and\nregistration exercises",
-          "confidence": 0.8133581280708313,
-          "start": 9,
-          "end": 13
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8213800191879272,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 8
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Venezuela",
-          "confidence": 0.8918527364730835,
-          "start": 3,
-          "end": 4
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Syrian\nrefugee population",
-          "confidence": 0.5060564875602722,
-          "start": 84,
-          "end": 87
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "annual vulnerability\nassessment",
-          "confidence": 0.9521070718765259,
-          "start": 51,
-          "end": 54
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Lebanon",
-          "confidence": 0.9729138016700745,
-          "start": 46,
-          "end": 47
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Syrian\nrefugee population",
-          "confidence": 0.7627159953117371,
-          "start": 84,
-          "end": 87
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data on\nrefugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.5387213826179504,
-          "start": 168,
-          "end": 174
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.691301703453064,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 8
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.992699921131134,
-          "start": 154,
-          "end": 155
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.9943016767501831,
-          "start": 179,
-          "end": 180
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.8818047642707825,
-          "start": 170,
-          "end": 174
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data",
-          "confidence": 0.5128545761108398,
-          "start": 308,
-          "end": 309
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## **II. Accountability to Affected People:**\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) is a commitment to the intentional and\nsystematic inclusion of the expressed needs, concerns, capacities, and views of persons of\nconcern in their diversity; and being answerable for our organisational decisions and staff\nactions, in all protection, assistance and solutions interventions and programmes.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### Achievements:\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** **Many UNHCR operations employ**\n**participatory methodologies on a**\n**continuous basis** throughout the\ndifferent phases of assessment,\nplanning, implementation, monitoring\nand evaluation. Participatory assessment\nexercises remain a critical component\nof UNHCR\u2019s AGD and communitybased protection approaches that are\nimplemented across operations. Some\noperations are taking special measures\nto ensure inclusion of populations that\nare often overlooked, including children\nand youth, in participatory assessments\nand within community structures.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** In **Rwanda**, participatory exercises\nwith children are conducted through\ninteractive activities and games (e.g.\ninteractive theatre, photography,\npainting workshops), lending to their\nincreased engagement and feedback.\nSimilarly, in Colombia, recreational\n\n\n\nactivities (handcrafts, photography,\nrole playing) are used during\nparticipatory exercises to help identify\nthe unique needs of children and\nensure their effective participation.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** **Italy:** Following consultations\nwith representative refugee\nnetworks, UNHCR re-prioritized the\nengagement and capacity-building of\nCBOs and refugee-led organizations,\nand PartecipAzione was launched\nin partnership with INTERSOS. To\npromote the protection and active\nparticipation of refugees in the\neconomic, social and cultural life of\nItaly, PartecipAzione helped build\nthe capacity of 10 local communitybased and refugee-led organizations\ncomprised of, or promoting\nparticipation of, refugees. Each\norganization benefited from training,\nfunding and networking, and nearly\n2,000 people participated in activities\nfunded through the projects they\ndeveloped.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n8 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\u00a9 **\u00a9** In **Lebanon**, five community reference\ngroups (CRGs) have been set up\n(47 members, 53% women,\n4% persons with disabilities) to\nadvise on the design of activities and\nprogrammes, including communication\nmethods and tools. In addition, a\nParticipatory Self-Evaluation is being\npiloted whereby 129 refugees have\nbeen mobilized as evaluators to help\nincrease refugee engagement in\nassessments, implementation and\nmonitoring and evaluation.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Many operations have introduced\ndiversified communication channels\nand mechanisms to engage persons\nat heightened risk more effectively\nand to share and obtain information\nabout needs and services. A number\nof operations are using innovative\nmeans (social media forums, telephone\ncounselling, online consultation portals,\nsatellite centres, mobile teams) to\nfacilitate information-sharing and\ncommunication with persons of concern,\nincluding those who are hard-to-reach.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Several operations offer remote\ncommunication options to increase\naccess to the most at-risk, hardto-reach persons of concern to\nUNHCR. In **China**, weekly telephone\ncounselling is provided with\ninterpreter assistance in addition to\nwalk-in counselling and other forms\nof support and information sharing,\nincluding Q&As. In the **Syrian Arab**\n**Republic**, UNHCR uses WhatsApp\ngroups, satellite centres and mobile\nteams. In **Lebanon**, WhatsApp\ncommunication trees allow for\ninformation provision and sharing\nbetween persons of concern and\nbetween UNHCR and persons of\nconcern. In **Costa Rica**, a free-of-cost\ncall centre was established.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** In **Venezuela**, mobile information\ndesks provide counselling to\ncommunity members in a private\nmanner. These mobile desks allow for\nidentification of persons at heightened\nrisk and offer personalized counselling\non rights, referral pathways and\navailable services.\n\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Many UNHCR operations have\nestablished and promoted feedback\nand response systems, including\nfor confidential complaints. UNHCR\nuses results of feedback to adapt its\nprogrammes and strategies and findings\nfrom annual participatory assessment\nexercises feed into planning across\noperations.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** **Ecuador:** A targeted participatory\nassessment exercise was organized\nwith persons of concern who do\nnot speak Spanish, respecting\ngender criteria in each focus group.\nAs a result of the feedback, a\ndifferentiated approach was taken to\npromote inclusion of more women in\nthe Graduation Model and to increase\navailability of Spanish language\ncourses.\n### Challenges:\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Engagement and access to information\nis hindered by location (hard-to-reach,\nsecurity concerns), heightened risk\nfactors, lack of accessible formats of\ncommunication, including language\ncomprehension and literacy level. Efforts\nto ensure inclusion and engagement\nof all persons of concern to UNHCR in\ndecision-making that affects their lives\nneed further investments; they need\nto be more regular, systematic and,\nfor those persons at heightened risk,\ntargeted.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Complaints are not always made due\nto limited access to communication\nchannels or lack of trust in them.\nDifferentiated reporting avenues should\nbe made available across operations to\nfacilitate safe and confidential reporting\non feedback and complaints.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Feedback provided does not\nsystematically receive a response or\nsystematically result in action. Persons\nof concern should be actively and\nsystematically engaged in ongoing\nprogramme monitoring and evaluation\nas well as in end-of-project assessments\nto provide regular or ongoing feedback\nand help improve programming.\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## **III. Advancing Gender Equality:**\n\n\n\nGender equality is fundamental to the wellbeing and rights of all persons of concern;\nit is central to UNHCR\u2019s AGD approach, and\nit is relevant to every aspect of UNHCR\u2019s\nwork. UNHCR\u2019s Updated Commitments to\nWomen and Girls implicitly recognize the\ndiversity amongst them, including older\nwomen; adolescent girls and female youth;\nwomen and girls belonging to national or\nethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities or\nindigenous groups; women and girls with\ndisabilities; and women and girls of diverse\nsexual orientations and gender identities.\n\n### Achievements:\n\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** UNHCR operations hold focus group\ndiscussions with women and girls\nduring annual Participatory Assessment\nexercises. Many operations have taken\nsteps to ensure equal representation in\nmanagement and leadership structures,\nsupporting women to put in place\nwomen\u2019s committees, prioritizing\nwomen representatives and leaders in\nexisting management structures, and\noffering training to build the leadership\nskills of women and to create a space\nfor them to serve as leaders in their\ncommunities.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** UNHCR operations, including\n**Afghanistan, Burundi, Central**\n**African Republic, Chad, Dominican**\n**Republic, Ethiopia, Georgia, India,**\n**Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mauritania,**\n**Pakistan, Panama, Rwanda, Senegal,**\n**Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey,**\n**Yemen**, and **Zambia**, engaged women\nin leadership structures and roles.\nAs such, women and girls: supported\nsensitizations and advocacy for\nwomen\u2019s rights; established Women\u2019s\nCommittees to foster mediation and\nconflict resolution within families\nand communities; were engaged\nin decision-making processes and\nmanagement related to community\nissues; supported distributions,\nprotection, sexual and gender-based\nviolence (SGBV), health, education,\n\n\n10 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n\n**UNHCR\u2019s Updated Commitments to Women**\n**and Girls**\n\n\n1. Women and girls participate equally and\nmeaningfully in all decision-making, community\nmanagement and leadership structures, and\ncommittees of persons of concern.\n\n2. Women and girls are provided with individual\nregistration and documentation, directly or through\nsupport provided by UNHCR.\n\n3. Women and girls have equal access to and control\nover management and provision of food, corerelief items, and cash-based interventions.\n\n4. Women and girls have equal access to economic\nopportunities, decent work, and quality education\nand health services.\n\n5. Women and girls have access to comprehensive\nSGBV prevention and response services.\n\n\nwater, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)\netc.; and helped support SGBV\nprevention and respond to SGBV and\nsexual exploitation and abuse (SEA)\ncases.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** **Bangladesh:** Women community\noutreach members, community\ngroups and elected leaders\ncontributed to improved identification\nof female refugees at heightened risk,\nindependent access to information for\nwomen and girls, and the provision of\nculturally sensitive peer support on\nissues of trafficking, early marriage,\ngirls\u2019 education and health.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Persons of concern are increasingly\nregistered on an individual basis and\nprovided individual documentation.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Operations, including **Burkina Faso,**\n**Egypt, India, Malaysia, Nepal**,\nand **Uganda**, made specific efforts\nto provide individual registration\nand issue individual documents to\npersons of concern, with an emphasis\non women. Operations also utilized\ninnovative means to ensure persons\nof concern were registered: Joint\nregistration was offered by UNHCR\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "and government authorities in **Chad** ;\nmobile registration was offered\nin remote locations of operations,\nsuch as **Jordan**, and promoted in\n**Venezuela** to support access to\nindigenous populations.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** In many operations, efforts are being\nmade to support women\u2019s and girls\u2019\nincreased access to, and control\nover, assistance and to ensure that\nlivelihoods, education and health\nprogramming target women and girls.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Operations, such as **Mozambique**,\nS **enegal, Tanzania** and **Uganda**, are\nincreasingly designating both men\nand women as primary recipients of\nassistance. In **Liberia**, and **Zambia**,\nwomen are included on distribution\ncommittees.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Efforts are made to develop initiatives\nthat meet the needs and interests\nof women and girls and encompass\nhome-based livelihoods activities and\nchildcare. In **Burkina Faso, Jordan,**\n**Uganda** and **Yemen**, daycare in\ncamps and community centres allows\nmothers to continue their studies\nand to engage in livelihoods and\ncommunity activities.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** The self-reliance of Rohingya refugee\nwomen and host community women\nis promoted in **Bangladesh** via a\ntraining centre and 18 sub-centres\nopened for women to learn silk\nscreen, block printing and tailoring.\nThe women receive a stipend with six\nmonths of training, and their products\nare sold in a well-known retail outlet,\na local social enterprise, that provides\nincome sources to rural women and\nthe raw materials and designs for\nthis project.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** UNHCR operations invest in community\nvolunteers and structures to enhance\nthe identification of SGBV risks, and to\nsupport SGBV prevention and response\nmechanisms; conduct awareness raising\non SGBV as a major prevention and\nrisk mitigation activity, which includes\ninforming survivors and communities\nof services and resources available to\nthem; and run safe spaces for women\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "and girls as well as other persons at\nheightened risk to enable survivors to\naccess psychosocial support or other\ntargeted assistance, including cash and\nshelter.\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Safe Spaces Networks, established in\neach country bordering **Venezuela**,\ninclude organizations providing\nholistic services for SGBV survivors.\nSimilarly, five local networks in\nApure, T\u00e1chira, Zulia, Bolivar and\nCaracas carry out activities favouring\nidentification of SGBV incidents and\npromoting a minimum package of\naccessible services (psychosocial\nsupport; medical services; sexual and\nreproductive health services; legal\nassistance; case management).\n\n\n\u00a9 **\u00a9** Through the Community Safety and\nAccess to Justice Project (CSAJ) in\n**Ethiopia**, UNHCR works closely with\nUN partners to train community police\non gender and SGBV response, and\nto increase the number of female\ncommunity police. Mobile courts also\nfacilitate access to justice, particularly\nfor women and girls.\n\n\n12 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n\nIn Jordan, UNHCR supports\nwomen of concern through Social\nEnterprise (SEP), which aims to\nbuild a brand that changes the\nlives and perceptions of refugees\nworldwide. SEP became a Made 51\npartner, allowing a global market\nplatform for refugee artisanal\nproducts to be branded, launched\nand managed. Partnership between\na Jordanian non-governmental\norganization (NGO), the Jordan\nRiver Foundation (JRF), and a\nmultinational corporation, IKEA,\ndraws on business solutions that\nhelp address Jordan\u2019s humanitarian\nand development challenges\nwhile creating jobs and providing\neconomic growth opportunities.\nThrough this project, 75 Syrian\nrefugee women gained employment.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### Challenges:\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** The meaningful participation of women\nand girls in leadership and management\nstructures is often limited or tokenistic,\nthus stifling their individual and collective\nagency along with their ability to influence\nthe decisions that impact their lives.\nVarious factors contribute to their limited\nparticipation: time-consuming survival\nand household responsibilities; restricted\nfreedom of movement; and failure of some\ncommunities to engage women and girls\nas leaders.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** In some operations, UNHCR is not\ndirectly involved in registration processes\nand, thus, may advocate for individual\nregistration but may not be able to ensure\nit happens systematically.\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Women and girls do not always have\naccess to assistance intended to reach\nthem. Social norms may make it difficult\nfor women to be designated as primary\nrecipients of assistance and for women\nand girls to enjoy equal access to, and\ncontrol over, the management and\nprovision of assistance.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** In some operations, lack of appropriate\nschool infrastructure (e.g. sex-separated\nlatrines), may cause girls to miss school\nparticularly during menstruation, as well\nas a lack of female teachers and gendersensitive pedagogy.\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Livelihood trainings are often genderbiased and do not always respond to the\nskills, situations, interests and needs of\nwomen.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Risks of SGBV remain elevated for persons\nof concern, in particular women and girls,\ndue to patriarchal societies and unequal\npower relations, and existing gaps in\nassistance and programming.\n\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Confidential, accessible and nonstigmatizing safe spaces are limited, as are\nmechanisms for early identification and\nreferral of persons at heightened risk in\nreception, registration and transit centres.\n**\u25cf\u25cf** Boys, men or LGBTI persons who\nexperience SGBV may not be able to\naccess care for several reasons, including\ndue to non-disclosure related to stigma\nand fear, and a lack of services geared to\nsupport them.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "14 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### **UNHCR Age, Gender and Diversity Policy (2018) \u2013** **The 10 obligatory core actions:**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|1. AGD-INCLUSIVE<br>PROGRAMMING|At a minimum, all data collected by UNHCR will be disaggregated by age<br>and sex and by other diversity considerations, as contextually appropriate<br>and possible, for purposes of analysis and programming.|\n|---|---|\n|2. PARTICIPATION AND<br>INCLUSION|At a minimum, country operations will employ participatory methodologies<br>at each stage of the operations management cycle, to incorporate<br>the capacities and priorities of women, men, girls, and boys of diverse<br>backgrounds into protection, assistance, and solutions programmes.|\n|3. COMMUNICATION<br>AND TRANSPARENCY|At a minimum, all country-level protection and solutions strategies will<br>detail the operation\u2019s approach to communicating with women, men, girls,<br>and boys of diverse backgrounds, through means that are appropriate and<br>accessible to all groups in a community.|\n|4. FEEDBACK AND<br>RESPONSE|At a minimum, all UNHCR operations will establish and promote feedback<br>and response systems, including for confdential complaints.|\n|5. ORGANIZATIONAL<br>LEARNING AND<br>ADAPTATION|At a minimum, UNHCR operations will adapt programmes and strategies in<br>response to input from persons of concern, and document this in Country<br>Operations Plans and Annual Reporting.|\n|6. ADVANCING GENDER<br>EQUALITY|a. Women and girls participate equally and meaningfully in all decision-<br>making, community management and leadership structures, and<br>committees of persons of concern. At a minimum, UNHCR operations<br>will ensure 50 per cent female participants in management and<br>leadership structures under UNHCR\u2019s authority, and will advocate the<br>same with partners, including Governments.|\n||b. Women and girls are provided with individual registration and<br>documentation, directly or through support provided by UNHCR. At<br>a minimum, UNHCR will provide women and girls of concern with<br>protection documentation on an individual basis, and will advocate the<br>same with partners, including Governments.|\n||c.<br>Women and girls have equal access to and control over management<br>and provision of food, core-relief items, and cash-based interventions.<br>Depending on the context, UNHCR operations will increase the<br>percentage of women as the primary recipients of assistance within<br>households receiving material and/or cash-based assistance.|\n||d. Women and girls have equal access to economic opportunities,<br>including decent work and quality education and health services. At<br>a minimum, UNHCR will ensure women and girls have equal access<br>to livelihood, education, and health programmes it delivers, and will<br>advocate with partners, including Governments, for their equal access<br>to public services.|\n||e. Women and girls have access to comprehensive SGBV prevention<br>and response services. At a minimum, UNHCR operations will adopt<br>and implement SGBV standard operating procedures, operationalizing<br>the four main referral pathways for all survivors (safety/security, legal,<br>medical, and psychosocial), and will promote the same with partners,<br>including Governments.|\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**For more information please contact:**\n\n\nDivision of International Protection\n\n\nCommunity-based Protection Unit\n\n\nhqts00@unchr.org\n\n\n16 UNHCR\u2019s Approach to Age, Gender and Diversity\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/d16f422e-d183-370c-8b8c-e545b17fdc75/5ebd5e344.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_131/raw/doc_131_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,359 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "### Sexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response\n\nMainstreaming project summary overviews\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n**MAINSTREAMING IN PRACTICE:** **.** ........................................................................................................................................................3\n\n\nTurkey: Building cross-sectoral bridges to combat SGBV **.** ......................................................................................................6\n\n\nUganda: Enhancing protection of women and girls through\nimproved menstrual hygiene management **.** ..................................................................................................................................9\n\n\nEgypt: Women\u2019s Leadership, empowerment, access and protection (LEAP)................................................................ 13\n\n\nJordan: Ensuring safe access to SGBV services and mitigating SGBV\nrisks within sectors using Empower mobile app....................................................................................................................... 17\n\n\nThe Democratic Republic of the Congo: HESHIMA project: promoting hygiene and self-reliance\nthrough the production of cloth sanitary pads by IDP women and girls in Kitchanga, North Kivu **.** .................... 21\n\n##### **BACKGROUND**\n\n\n[As a core part of its protection mandate, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/women/5ce7d6784/sexual-gender-based-violence-prevention-risk-mitigation-response.html)\ncommitted to ending all forms of sexual and gender based-violence (SGBV) by preventing and reducing the risks\nof SGBV before it happens, and responding to the needs of all survivors.\n\n\nIn 2018, UNHCR launched a mainstreaming project, through funding from [Safe from the Start (SftS), with the](http://www.unhcr.org/575a83dd5.html)\nspecific objective of enhancing UNHCR work towards further institutionalization of SGBV prevention, risk\nmitigation and response interventions. For UNHCR, SGBV mainstreaming specifically refers to the integration\nof appropriate prevention, risk mitigation and response strategies across all areas of programming and\nresponse.\n\n\nThe project specifically focuses on risk mitigation and understanding who is at risk, the source of that risk, and\nthe (un)intended impact of acting or not acting in order to mitigate risks. Mainstreaming also requires that\nUNHCR workforce and partners know how to safely handle disclosure as well as the referral pathways for\nservices and case management.\n\n\nThe development of this guide was made possible with support from the US BPRM Safe from the Start Initiative\non protection from Sexual and Gender-based Violence in emergencies.\n\n\nThis document is for general distribution. All rights reserved. Reproductions and translations are authorized,\nexcept for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.\n\n\n\u00a9 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, December 2019\n\n\nCover photo: DRC \u00a9 UNHCR/Natalia Micevic/2018\n\n\nLayout & design: BakOS DESIGN\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## MAINSTREAMING IN PRACTICE:\n\n##### **CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION**\n\n\n\nA call for proposals on SGBV prevention, risk\nmitigation and response mainstreaming was\nlaunched in 2018. The overall objective was to\nsupport the implementation and documentation of\npractices and multisectoral projects in country of\noperations that aimed to:\n\n\n\u00bb initiate or boost SGBV mainstreaming activities,\nand/or;\n\n\n\u00bb build on/develop innovative new responses to\nSGBV mainstreaming programming, and/or;\n\n\n\u00bb strengthen UNHCR institutional process/\nelement of the operations management\ncycle (OMC) with regard to mainstreaming/\nintegrating SGBV prevention, risk mitigation\nand/or response components.\n\n\nThe application process was open to 16 operations\nthat participated in a [regional workshop on](https://www.unhcr.org/5c9b811b7)\n[mainstreaming SGBV prevention, risk mitigation](https://www.unhcr.org/5c9b811b7)\n[and response. The selected projects were part](https://www.unhcr.org/5c9b811b7)\nof an overall approach and support to develop\nstaff capacity and to build evidence and fill an\ninformation gap on how to effectively operationalize\nmainstreaming in different aspects of UNHCR work.\n\n\nThe projects were important institutionally and\nsupported the communities in the following ways:\n\n\n\u00bb addressed the needs and rights of communities\nin line with UNHCR policy on age, gender and\ndiversity (AGD);\n\n\n\u00bb offered a practical opportunity for the\nimplementation of the 2015 [Inter-Agency](http://www.gbvguidelines.org/)\n[Standing Committee (IASC) Guidelines](http://www.gbvguidelines.org/)\n[on Integrating Gender-Based Violence](http://www.gbvguidelines.org/)\n[Interventions in Humanitarian Action, and the](http://www.gbvguidelines.org/)\napplication of core mainstreaming principles\nacross different sectors [1] ; and\n\n\n\n\u00bb provided UNHCR the chance to identify,\ndocument and field test different ways of\nincreasing appropriate, early, efficient and\neffective programming to prevent, mitigate and\nrespond to SGBV across UNHCR operations.\n\n\nA preliminary screening of applications ensured that\nthe projects met the following submission criteria:\n\n\nThe selection panel prioritized projects that\nsupported a multifunctional approach in design,\nimplementation, monitoring and demonstrated\nthat a site-specific multifunctional coordination\nmechanism was in place to provide oversight.\n\n\nRemote technical support was available for\neach implementing project team through a\nmultifunctional team comprised of regional and\nheadquarters-based colleagues. Throughout the\nprocess, lessons learned were documented in order\nto disseminate and replicate the practices.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1 For more information on the GBV Guidelines please visit www.gbvguidelines.org.\n\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "in Turkey, 98 per cent were from Syria. [3] Numerous\nparticipatory assessments undertaken with refugee\ncommunities in Turkey since 2016 indicated that\nincidents of SGBV, particularly intimate partner\nviolence (IPV) and sexual harassment, as well as\nengagement in harmful practices such as child and\nforced marriage and sex work were increasing.\nSeveral identified contributing factors were\nspecifically noted, including the protracted nature of\nthe displacement, a lack of economic opportunities,\nsocial exclusion, discrimination and social tensions.\n\n\nSome of the main challenges related to employment\nand skills development reported by women and\nyouth to UNHCR include: lack of day care services\nfor children, language barriers, lack of relevant\nskills to seek employment, limited education, no\nproof of previous academic attainment, all of which\nlimit access to job opportunities. The limited access\nto formal work permits was also reported as well\nas a lack of insurance, poor pay and long working\nhours and increased potential exposure to risk of\nexploitation and abuse.\n\n\nIt is widely acknowledged that SGBV remains\nhighly underreported by refugee communities in\nTurkey, including in employment contexts, mainly\ndue to cultural barriers and stigma. Gaps in the\nmultisectoral referral pathways and uneven levels\nof community engagement also exist in places\ncompounding the contributing factors.\n\n\n\nresponse intervention. Honouring this commitment\nrequires a coordinated, multisectoral, multilayered\napproach requiring close coordination at all levels,\nactively conducting SGBV sensitization, capacity\ndevelopment, and strengthening multisectoral\nresponse and risk mitigation interventions across all\nsectors.\n\n\nThe _Building bridges_ project was implemented across\nmultiple sites in three provinces: Istanbul, Ankara\nand Hatay. Through partnerships with national\ninstitutions active in the prevention and mitigation\nof SGBV risks, the objective of the project was to\nstrengthen the skills and coping mechanisms of\nindividuals at-risk of SGBV and to increase quality\nand timely response for SGBV. This involved three\ninterrelated components:\n\n\n- Capacity development of stakeholders:\ncapacity development activities focused on\nSGBV prevention, risk mitigation, response\nmainstreaming into existing programmes\nimplemented across all sectors.\n\n\n- Sensitization: information dissemination\ntargeted refugee and local communities on SGBV\nprevention and response.\n\n\n- Multisectoral interventions targeting those atrisk and survivors of SGBV, including:\n\n\n\n2 To provide a picture of the context in which each project was implemented, the population data details for each country is limited to\n2018, which was when the projects began.\n\n3 https://www.unhcr.org/5c52ea084.pdf.\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "SGBV",
-          "confidence": 0.8458899855613708,
-          "start": 188,
-          "end": 189
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Turkey",
-          "confidence": 0.8491920828819275,
-          "start": 196,
-          "end": 197
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee communities",
-          "confidence": 0.9546659588813782,
-          "start": 193,
-          "end": 195
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "population data",
-          "confidence": 0.9121425151824951,
-          "start": 413,
-          "end": 415
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "each country",
-          "confidence": 0.7221806049346924,
-          "start": 417,
-          "end": 419
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.9978475570678711,
-          "start": 422,
-          "end": 423
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and local communities",
-          "confidence": 0.8879182934761047,
-          "start": 374,
-          "end": 378
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "      - Turkish language training (A1 and A2 levels);\n\n\n      - vocational training (mainly adolescents and\nadults above 18);\n\n\n      - referrals to public education opportunities\n(mainly children under 18);\n\n\n      - provision of cash-based incentives to ensure\nmeaningful participation in language/\nvocational courses;\n\n\n      - multipurpose cash grants for survivors of\nSGBV; and\n\n\n      - provision of case management services\nincluding psychosocial support in individual\nand group sessions, legal support, education\nand social protection support.\n\n##### Community engagement in project design\n\n\nIndividuals and communities were engaged in\nevery facet of the project, from its design, through\nconsultative and decision-making processes, as\nwell as implementation, monitoring and evaluation\nprocesses.\n\n#### _\u201c [I learned a lot from the training and would like to ]_\n\n_thank you. You gave us hope, and we learned that_\n_we should be powerful for our own future and fight_\n_for everything that we want to achieve.\u201d_\n\n\nGirl-child participant in the sensitization sessions.\n\n#### _\u201c [We learned very useful information and will also ]_\n\n_teach and tell others what we have learned.\u201d_\n\n\nGirl-child participant in the sensitization sessions.\n\n#### _\u201c [When we return home, let\u2019s all wash the dishes...\u201d]_\n\nMale participant in the awareness-raising sessions\n\n##### Results\n\n\n**Nine hundred and six individuals** were identified\nas interested in the provision of support through\nboth language and/or vocational training and SGBV\n\n\n**6** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\nsensitization sessions. This included individuals\nwho were also referred to multisectoral support\nincluding education and psychosocial support.\n\n\n**Out of the 131 women at-risk and SGBV survivors**\n**identified in three provinces, 79 successfully**\n**completed the Turkish A1 level language classes,**\n**six currently continue at A2 level, and 35 are**\n**pending new enrolment.** Beyond the outcome of\nlanguage acquisition, participants reported to have\nmore freedom due to the increased support to\nattend the courses from male family members.\n\n#### _\u201c [\u0003Prior to taking the course, I was afraid of ]_\n\n_approaching my child\u2019s teacher. The more I learn,_\n_the more I feel comfortable to start talking with_\n_the teacher. I hope I will be able to talk with her_\n_fluently one day.\u201d_\n\n\nTR language course participant in Hatay\n\n\nSome participants also started attending additional\nsessions on their rights, available assistance and\nservices. Reflecting of the value appointed to the\nsessions, some participants brought people from\ntheir communities increasing the scope of the\nproject. The participants\u2019 commitment was also\nobserved in terms of low drop-out rates, as well\nas the willingness of participants to pursue their\nstudies in 2019.\n\n\n**The project contributed to build a positive**\n**social cohesion and peaceful coexistence from**\n**the perspective of the participants.** As a result\nof increased confidence in learning the Turkish\nlanguage, the majority of participants reported\nfeeling more comfortable when interacting with the\nlocal host community.\n\n\n**Attendance rates in language classes remained**\n**high.** Forty-eight women were provided with\nmulti-cash payments, and a total of 93 women (with\nattendance rates of 80 per cent and above) were\nprovided financial support to attend the Turkish\nlanguage courses.\n\n\nFinally, a total of **827 individuals from all three**\n**provinces, including men and boys**, benefitted from\nsensitization sessions on SGBV prevention and\nresponse.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 Children painting and drawing in kindergarten in Hatay. Their parents are participants of the Building bridges project.\nThe project supports children of participant by ensuring the care arrangements, as well as providing psychosocial support\n(PSS) activities in the child friendly spaces. Photo credit: Support to Life (Hatay)\n\n\n##### Lessons learned and tips for replication\n\n\n- Standardizing procedures for programme\nimplementation across locations and having\na consistent timeline for payment cycles are\neffective practices and essential to ensure that\ncash payments are received on time.\n\n\n- Providing training to all participating staff on\ngood practices and risk mitigation in cash-based\ninterventions at the beginning of the project is\nessential to develop capacity and common ways\nof working, and to increase coordination amongst\na multifunctional team.\n\n\n- Developing common training materials for\nsensitization sessions, as well as common\nreporting templates for partners\u2019 use for more\nconsistent and unified reporting, increases\nsmooth and systematic implementation and\nmonitoring of project results and outcomes.\n\n\n- Addressing barriers (e.g. transportation costs\nto improve access to education, life skills and\nvocational activities) is essential to allow for\nparticipation and to reduce risks to potentially\nharmful practices.\n\n\n#### _\u201c [The project supported SGBV risk mitigation in ]_\n\n_cash assistance in a contextually relevant and_\n_meaningful way.\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR staff member\n\n##### Next steps\n\n\nTurkish language courses and vocational courses\nwill continue. In Istanbul, there was a strong\nwillingness to continue to A2 level language\ncourses in 2019 by women who have received\nA1 level certificates. Some partners have also\nestablished close linkages with local authorities\nwho have agreed to prioritize SGBV survivors and\nthose at-risk of SGBV to enrol in courses (e.g. at\nthe Public Education Center in Istanbul). The use\nof multipurpose cash as a protection mechanism\nto support survivors of SGBV will be increased\nand will include a measurement of the impact in\nthe protection monitoring strategy that is being\nmodified and updated. UNHCR Turkey will expand\nthe recipients of multipurpose cash to include male\nand gender-non-conforming SGBV survivors. This\ncomponent is also expected to increase the numbers\nof SGBV referrals to UNHCR and partners.\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Context\n\nrefugee settlement hosted 68,703 persons of\nconcern comprised of 60 per cent children under\n18 years of age and 49 per cent women and girls of\nreproductive age. [5]\n\n\nThe protracted nature of displacement coupled\nwith deteriorating economic conditions and limited\nlivelihood opportunities continue to increase\nthe risk of SGBV, especially among female heads\nof households, unaccompanied children and\nadolescent girls. Among the South Sudanese and\nCongolese refugees who make up the majority\nof the population in the Kyangwali settlement,\nmenstrual hygiene management (MHM) presents\na significant challenge and affects women and girls\nwho are unable to afford hygiene materials.\n\n\nKyangwali\u2019s population has nearly doubled since the\narrival of refugees from the DRC in mid-December\n2017, straining the already limited resources. The\nhumanitarian response has since struggled to meet\nthe needs of the community, resulting in inadequate\nmenstrual hygiene facilities and service provision.\n\n\n4 https://www.unhcr.org/5c52ea084.pdf.\n\n5 **https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/63277** .\n\n\n**8** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\neducate girls on MHM were compounding factors.\n\n\n**To ensure acceptability of the product, the**\n**multifunctional team carried out consultations**\n**with women in Kyangwali to:**\n\n\n - Identify materials used for menstrual hygiene\nmanagement before and after their arrival in\nthe refugee settlement.\n\n\n - Explore challenges faced by women and girls\nof reproductive age when using menstrual\nhygiene products that were previously\ndistributed in the settlement.\n\n\n - Understand women and girls\u2019 choices on the\ntype of sanitary pads that they prefer and the\neffects of having or not having the menstrual\nhygiene management products in their routine\nactivities.\n\n\n - Identify the preferred channels for information\ndissemination about menstrual hygiene.\n\n\n - Assess the availability of WASH facilities in the\nschool and out-of-school environment in the\nproject implementation areas.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 Partner staff holding meeting with women\u2019s group in Nyamiganda benefitting from the MHM project.\n\u00a9 Norman Mpirwe (HIJRA)\n\n\n\nThe project had two main objectives:\n\n\n- ensuring that the population has optimal access\nto education facilities with safe and conducive\nWASH facilities in school that promote girls\u2019\nretention, thereby mitigating SGBV-related risks\nand consequences; and\n\n\n- reducing the risk of SGBV though an increase to\naccess business skills and financial services for\nwomen.\n\n##### Community engagement in project design\n\n\nExtensive consultation with refugee women and\ngirls during the initial assessment and throughout\nthe project ensured a robust community-based\napproach was applied from the outset. Training\nwas conducted for the multifunctional team, which\nincluded staff from WASH, Education, Livelihood\nand Health sectors and included training on the\nIASC GBV Guidelines [6] and the [Menstrual Hygiene](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/2113/themhminemergenciestoolkitfullguide.pdf)\n[Management in Emergencies Toolkit.](https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/2113/themhminemergenciestoolkitfullguide.pdf)\n\n\n6 For more information and resources see https://gbvguidelines.org/en/.\n\n\n##### Results\n\n**Community sensitization on SGBV and the**\n**importance of MHM was conducted:** 2,417\n(F=1,450 and M=967) community members\nwere reached with sensitization and communitybased activities focusing on menstruation and\nmenstrual hygiene management, stigma related to\nmenstruation, safe disposal of used products and\nSGBV.\n\n\n**Women\u2019s groups and committees were**\n**empowered with business skills:** 17 women\u2019s\ngroups comprised of 320 women were trained on\nSGBV, business skills and the production of reusable\nsanitary materials. The training provided women\u2019s\ngroups the financial capacity and business skills to\naccess local financial services and increased their\nconfidence in buying and selling reusable sanitary\npads locally and through the savings associations.\nTo ensure sustainability of the project, the selected\nwomen\u2019s groups were trained on the Village Savings\nand Loan Associations (VSLAs) methodology and\nentrepreneurship and self-employment.\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **9**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 \u00a9 UNHCR/Constanze Quosh\n\n\n**Capacity of service providers, sectoral leads and**\n**project participants on SGBV mainstreaming**\n**and case management was enhanced:** 207\n(F=100, M=107) teachers and members of parent\nteachers associations (PTAs), school management\ncommittees, WASH committees, and school clubs\nwere trained on basic concepts of SGBV and\nrisk mitigation pertinent to particular sectors. A\nworkshop on case management, including safe\ndisclosures and referrals, was also conducted.\n\n\n**Infrastructure to ensure safe disposal of menstrual**\n**waste in school and to promote girls\u2019 retention**\n**was constructed or rehabilitated:** rehabilitation of\ndilapidated latrines and construction of incinerators\nwas carried out in six schools.\n\n\n**Contextually appropriate menstrual hygiene kits**\n**were distributed to women and girls to contribute**\n**to school retention and potential exposure to**\n**sexual exploitation and abuse:** a needs assessment\non the use of MHM products was carried out in two\nvillages to ensure that the items selected as part of\nthe MHM kits were deemed acceptable and of good\nquality.\n\n\n##### Lessons learned and tips for replication\n\n\n- Creating livelihood opportunities through\nproduction of low-cost reusable sanitary\nmaterials enables refugee women and girls to\nreduce the risk of SGBV and to develop a sense of\nself-reliance.\n\n\n- MHM is an area that requires cross-cutting\ncoordination to ensure that the hierarchy of\nMHM needs are effectively addressed, along\nwith the 4Cs of effective MHM programming**coordination, consultation, culture and**\n**communication** . [7]\n\n\n- A rapid contextualized assessment with\ncommunity members on the availability,\naccessibility, acceptability and quality of\nmenstrual hygiene supplies is essential prior to\nthe design stage.\n\n\n- Sectors responsible for communal facilities,\nparticularly schools, hospitals and other public\nbuildings must consult women and girls on the\nappropriate design of latrine facilities. Planning\nand costing must incorporate these factors.\n\n\n- Ensuring optimal use of resources is paramount\nand avoiding the later correction of unacceptable\nlatrines should be a priority. All agreements\nwith those responsible for implementing\nthe programming must adhere to contextappropriate design in line with appropriate\nstandards.\n\n\n- Ensure that the women\u2019s groups producing\nreusable sanitary pads have an adequate safe\nspace and a sustainable structure for their\nproduction activities and for storing fabrics and\nwork kits.\n\n\n\n7 For more information please see the MHM in Emergencies Toolkit \u2013 https://bit.ly/2Rb1ObJ.\n\n\n**10** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### _\u201c [When confronted with the monthly menstruation ]_\n\n_cycle at school \u2026sometimes I do not have option_\n_but [I am] forced to ask my boyfriend for money to_\n_buy sanitary pads as my parents can\u2019t afford them_\n_\u2026 then my boyfriend asks for sex in return and I feel_\n_abused especially if the money is given to me by my_\n_boyfriend after sex.\u201d_\n#### _\u201c [When we want to answer a question in the ]_\n\n_classroom, I fear to stand up as my blood may come_\n_out and the boys will laugh at me.\u201d_\n#### _\u201c [And those who don\u2019t have money to buy pads use ]_\n\n_locally available materials as long as money is not_\n_there, those materials they use really burn between_\n_the legs, and later on blisters come out.\u201d_\n#### _\u201c [Last term I did not come to school during the exam ]_\n\n_time that coincided with my menstrual period, as I_\n_do not have sanitary materials and could not afford_\n_to buy any, I missed the exam, that\u2019s why I repeated_\n_Primary 6.\u201d_\n\n\nExcerpts taken from focus group discussions during\n\nassessment and community-based sensitization sessions\n\n##### Next steps\n\n\nAll initiated activities will continue in 2019. The\ninclusion of MHM in fundraising plans and advocacy\nwill be prioritized.\n\n\nUNHCR and partners will support the women\u2019s\ngroups who are producing and selling reusable\nsanitary pads materials and technical support to\nincrease self-reliance.\n\n\nThe operation is also developing a tool that will be\nused to conduct assessment on MHM programming\nand a guidance note to support partners with MHM\nprogramming.\n\n\n##### Story of change\n\n\u201cWhen we came from [DR] Congo during the\nwar, I left my husband back\u2026 and I came with\nmy children. In Congo, issues surrounding\nmenstruation is so \u2026 personal and you cannot\ntell your mother or your father that you are\nexperiencing menstrual periods. Most of the\nfamilies in Congo, especially in rural villages,\nhave never seen or even used menstrual hygiene\nsanitary pads other than locally available\nclothing materials. When I turned 13 years old\nin 1976, I was in Primary three and this is when\nI got my first period. I did not know what to do\nand I thought something wrong was happening\n\u2026 maybe I had been bewitched! When I arrived\nin Uganda as an asylum-seeker in 2014 my\ndaughter was given two pieces of sanitary pads\nat the reception centre in Kagoma and I thought\nit was edible because it was well packaged.\nThe pads were meant for my young girl and\nshe had never seen the packed sanitary pads\nat 15 years of age. I got to know that they were\npads, and later we got a training conducted by\nHIJRA and a female staff mobilized in my village\nof Nyamiganda, for the awareness on the use\nof sanitary pads and I had an enthusiasm to\nparticipate. Then the next day she came with\npads and showed us how to wear them.\n\n\nIn my own capacity, I could not afford to buy\npads on a monthly basis because I have six girls\nand all are experiencing menstrual periods and\nit\u2019s costly to buy pads given my economic status.\nWe have been using local materials like pieces of\nclothes. We had a training organized by HIJRA\nand we were trained in November 2018 for\ntwo weeks on how to make reusable sanitary\npads using a sewing machine. Currently, we are\norganized into different women\u2019s groups where\nwe were supported with sewing machines and\nfabrics, and now we are making pads and my\ngirls have used them and I now feel proud and\nhappy because I no longer fear blood spots on\nmy skirts and my girls will not miss school. I can\nnow participate in village meetings since I can\naccess them locally.\u201d\n\n\n42-year-old Mbiride Kyabisiku a single mother\nwith seven children from Nyamiganda village.\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **11**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## EGYPT\n\n**CAIRO**\n\n\n##### Context\n\n8 https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/68254.\n\n\n**12** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThis project included both Egyptian and refugee\ncommunity members. It aimed to empower women\nwith specific needs, especially those at-risk of SGBV,\nby increasing their access to diversified and safe\neconomic opportunities, and enhancing their access\nto safe and effective protection services through\nestablished Government mechanisms. The overall\nobjectives were to engage women and girls as active\nparticipants in protection from violence through\ngroup activities and to provide linkages to individual\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "support services in line with SGBV standard\noperating procedures (SOPs) and referral pathways.\nThe specific project objectives included:\n\n\n- at-risk asylum-seeking women and female youth\nacquire safe income-generating and economic\nopportunities via cash-for-work and skills\ndevelopment;\n\n\n- women acquire skills required for production and\nentering the labor market; and\n\n\n- asylum-seeking and refugee women and female\nyouth have enhanced access to effective services\nand protection mechanisms.\n\n\nThe NCW premises in Giza were providing the\nvenue for the centre development due to the\nproximity of neighbourhoods where refugee\ncommunities mainly reside. It is an important\ncommunity-based centre offering counselling and\nprotection services to refugee and Egyptian women.\n\n\n##### Community engagement in project design\n\nDuring the planning and implementation phases,\nthere was a participatory assessment and regular\nconsultation with women participants. This\ncontributed to developing a project aiming to\novercome the cultural and personal barriers that\nprevent women from accessing safe livelihood\nopportunities.\n\n##### Results\n\n\nParticipants\u2019 socioeconomic empowerment\nand community support was increased\n\n\nThe inclusion of participants from different\nnationalities and backgrounds in the life skills\nand vocational training sessions contributed to\nan increased sense of community among the\nparticipants. Together, the participants came up\nwith more than twenty innovative business ideas\nincluding but not limited to educational centres for\nteaching foreign languages, birthday decorations,\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **13**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "home d\u00e9cor products, etc. Some participants\ndecided to join forces to set up collective beauty\ncentres.\n\n#### _\u201c [The training had a very positive impact on me as ]_\n\n_well as on my family.\u201d_\n\n\nParticipant in the training\n\n\nSkills of participants were enhanced\n\n\nThe skills of 260 participating women were\nenhanced through vocational skills, marketing and\nbusiness training. The women were connected with\npotential clients and different supply vendors for\nproduct crafting to apply their post-training skills.\n\n\nAn additional 207 female participants received\ntraining tailored to their skill-based jobs specific\nduring career counselling sessions. The training\nalso included general modules on efficient ways\nof budgeting, managing income, applying for\ngrants and loans, and the basics of ideation and\nmicrobusiness management/finances\u2014all of\nwhich are key areas for business management.\nEntrepreneurship and financial literacy training\nfurther allowed the participants to have more\ncontrol over their assets.\n\n\nSGBV awareness was increased\n\n\nFour hundred and forty-seven male and female\nparticipants attended SGBV sensitization sessions\non issues related to gender and SGBV, including\nknowledge of where survivors can report risks and\nsafely access services. Participants reported that\ntheir knowledge on SGBV improved, including on\nSGBV reporting mechanisms, how to access to\nservices, and the different types of violence that\nrefugee women may be exposed to at the work\nplace.\n\n\nThe national response to refugee SGBV\nsurvivors was enhanced\n\n\nEighteen officers in the National Council for\nWomen\u2019s Complaint Office (NCWCO) were trained\non SGBV, which strengthened and increased\ncollaboration on case management.\n\n\n**14** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\nFeedback from participants form NCWCO on SGBV\nawareness sessions for NCW complaint officers:\n\n#### _\u201c [The training has increased my knowledge of the ]_\n\n_cooperation of the different actors involved in the_\n_SGBV response\u201d._\n\n#### _\u201c [I have increased my knowledge on legal ]_\n\n_information regarding SGBV and refugees\u201d._\n\n#### _\u201c [I feel more capable now to protect refugees from ]_\n\n_violence\u201d._\n\n#### _\u201c [Now I am knowledgeable of the different ]_\n\n_organizations that provide legal and social support_\n_to refugees\u201d._\n\n##### Lessons learned and tips for replication\n\n\n- Joint and comprehensive assessments that\ninclude safety and security risks, requirements\nand measures must be conducted and revisited at\nall stages of implementation.\n\n\n- Working with non-humanitarian partners, such\nas the private sector, requires additional support\nand orientation.\n\n\n- Working with national structures requires a welldefined implementation plan to ensure timeliness\nin project implementation.\n\n\n- Coordination of multiple partners and\nstakeholders requires a clear management plan\nwith in-built flexibility to adapt to changing\nscenarios, particularly for procurement.\n\n\n- Setting achievable and reasonable targets is\nessential for maintaining motivation of all actors,\nespecially during short implementation periods.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Next steps\n\nThe project is sustained following the\nimplementation of the additional core activities as\npart of the Operation\u2019s plan for 2019. One of the\nmeasures taken to ensure sustainability has been\nthe utilization and mobilization of existing resources\nto promote the economic empowerment of the\nparticipants. The mapping and subsequent selection\nof existing space was made in consultation with the\nwomen participants to ensure proximity to areas of\nresidence and suitability.\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **15**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Jordan continued to host 705,800 refugees by mid2018. As with other countries in the region, the vast\nmajority were from Syria (667,200). Other countries\nof refugees\u2019 origin in Jordan were Iraq (34,400) and\nSudan (2,700). [9]\n\n\n**Of the total registered Syrians in Jordan, 50.4**\n**per cent are female and 49.6 per cent are male.**\n**Children represent 51 per cent of the entire**\n**refugee population. 78.7 per cent of Syrians live**\n**in urban areas across the country: Amman, Irbid,**\n**Mafraq and Zarqa governorates.**\n\n\nIn 2017, according to the GBV Information\nManagement System (IMS) Task Force, 94.6 per\ncent of SGBV survivors assisted were women\nand girls. Child marriage remains a major concern\nfor refugees in Jordan. Sexual violence remains\nunderreported due to extreme social stigma.\nWomen and girls also often face risks of sexual\nharassment in most public spaces and have reported\nbeing particularly concerned by the increase of\nsexual harassment occurring over the phone.\nLesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex\npersons refugees are often exposed to emotional\nand physical abuse. Most survivors approached\nSGBV service providers more than a month after\nthe incident. This indicated an urgent need for\na more efficient referral pathway for survivors\nand persons at-risk of SGBV, including efforts to\ndisseminate information about SGBV services\n\n\n9 https://www.unhcr.org/5c52ea084.pdf. P. 9\n\n\n**16** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\nwithin communities and also within non-specialized\nservice providers.\n\n\n**COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION**\n**IN PROJECT DESIGN**\n\n\nThe community was engaged from the onset of\nthe project through consultations based on AGD\napproach:\n\n\nWomen, girls, boys and men were consulted\non the design of the app and efforts were\nundertaken to ensure marginalized groups were\nactively included.\n\n\nThe community was consulted during the\ndevelopment of the standardized list of risk\npoints to ensure it was drafted in a simple\nlanguage and covered different type of risks.\n\n\nTo develop the mobile application, seven sessions\nwere held between UNHCR SGBV staff and the\nmobile application development company, and\nthree testing sessions were done with end users\n(refugees and staff).\n\n\nMembers of the SGBV SWG consulted more\nthan 350 refugees and host community members\non the application and they selected the name\n\u201cAmaali\u201d. which means \u2018my hopes\u2019.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "standardized list of risk\npoints",
-          "confidence": 0.8921260833740234,
-          "start": 376,
-          "end": 381
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and host community members",
-          "confidence": 0.7422350645065308,
-          "start": 442,
-          "end": 447
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Amaali",
-          "confidence": 0.8285030126571655,
-          "start": 456,
-          "end": 457
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and host community members",
-          "confidence": 0.776739239692688,
-          "start": 442,
-          "end": 447
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Project background and objective\n\nBuilding on the practice established in Lebanon\nwith the use of the \u201cRespond\u201d mobile application\n(App), which allows non-specialized humanitarian\nstaff to conduct safe referrals, UNHCR Jordan\naimed to implement an innovative mobile app. The\napp called \u201c _Amaali (my hopes)_ \u201d could also be easily\nreplicated in other operations. The objective was to\nenable non-specialized service providers to refer\nSGBV survivors through access to updated referral\npathways while respecting the survivor-centred\napproach. The project aimed at ensuring that SGBV\nsurvivors are empowered throughout service\ndelivery and potential SGBV risks mitigated.\n\n\nThe project specific objectives of the Amaali App\nwere to:\n\n\n- be easily accessible to humanitarian workers in all\nsectors and to contain guidance for safe referrals\nas well as contacts of SGBV case management\nservice providers in each region of Jordan;\n\n\n- be accessible to refugees and include hotlines for\nSGBV survivors to access support and services;\nand\n\n\n- have a public interface accessible to both\nrefugees and humanitarian aid workers with a\nplatform to map risk points.\n\n#### _\u201c [When we were working on the script for the play ]_\n\n_with the group, women shared stories about sexual_\n_harassment in the camp. It helped me to better_\n_understand the numerous difficulties that women_\n_are facing in Zaatari camp and feel empathy. I_\n_realized that other refugees in the camp are not_\n_aware about services available for survivors of_\n_violence. So I was very proud to present the play_\n_in the camp and share our message with our_\n_community\u201d._\n\n\nMale Syrian refugee, member of the community group in\n\nZaatari\n\n\n#### _\u201c [When we presented our movie and talked with the ]_\n\n_audience about sexual harassment, many shared_\n_that they were not aware sexual harassment_\n_was such a risk for women and girls in Jordan. At_\n_the end, people shared that they will not remain_\n_silent and will encourage survivors to report_\n_sexual harassment. I feel that this project really_\n_gave us the opportunity to positively impact our_\n_community_\n\n\nRefugee volunteer leading community group in Amman\n\n##### Community engagement in project design\n\n\nWomen, girls, boys and men, especially including\nthose from marginalized groups, were consulted\non the design of the app. The community was\nalso consulted during the development of the\nstandardized list of risk points, as to ensure it was\ndrafted in a simple language and addressed different\ntype of risks.\n\n\nRefugee and host community youth were also\nkey participants in the development of awareness\nmaterials, which are uploaded on the app.\nCommunity members who are perceived as role\nmodel within their community were engaged and\ntheir stories/messages disseminated through the\napp.\n\n##### Results\n\n\n**Effective mobilization of refugee communities**\n**to prevent, mitigate and respond to SGBV was**\n**achieved through various modalities:** in Amman,\none youth group of female students produced their\nown video aiming at reducing stigma faced by SGBV\nsurvivors in their communities. The video addressed\nchild marriage, intimate partner violence and\nsexual harassment while encouraging communities\nto transcend the culture of silence and step up to\nsupport SGBV survivors.\n\n\nIn Zaatari, a silent play was designed by male and\nfemale refugees to highlight stigma faced by a girl\nsurvivor of sexual harassment trying to seek help\nfrom her parents. Positive feedback on the theatre\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **17**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 \u00a9 NHF / Tamara Al-Dweiri. Silent theatre play\nZaatari, Dec. 2018\n\n\nplays indicated that youth groups were able to\nchallenge harmful stereotypes on sexual harassment\nand promote a survivor centred approach.\n\n\n**Four SGBV prevention community groups were**\n**established** (two in Amman, one in Jerash and one\nin Zaatari camp): thanks to leadership skills and\nthe passion of the refugee volunteers, the groups\nmanaged to overcome cultural taboos around\nSGBV (especially about sexual harassment) and\ndesign their own awareness-raising project. Many\nfemale refugees had expressed that the app will\nbe an important tool to ensure they have access to\ninformation about services. They felt strongly that\nthe risk mapping tool will be helpful for them to\navoid unsafe areas. Five awareness-raising materials\nwere developed: three short videos on women\u2019s\nempowerment, an SGBV prevention cartoon\nproduced by refugee youth, and a safe referrals\nvideo for frontline workers.\n\n\n**Six hundred and forty refugees were reached**\n**through dissemination sessions** (Amman: 290,\nZaatari: 250, Jerash/Ajloun: 100). Other groups in\nAmman, Zaatari and Jerash used theatre to raise\nawareness about risks of sexual harassment and\nreduce stigma for survivors.\n\n\n**18** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\n**Survivor-centred attitudes among frontline**\n**workers were enhanced:** SGBV safe referral\ntrainings helped develop frontline workers\u2019 skills\nwhen interacting with survivors. During the project,\n152 staff and 56 refugee volunteers were trained on\nsafe referrals. The project\u2019s training and awareness\nactivities addressed the limited knowledge amongst\nsurvivors and non-specialized service providers on\nthe availability of SGBV services. It also addressed\nthe persistent gap in programming related to\nchallenges around dissemination of multisectoral\nreferral pathways.\n\n#### _\u201c [This project showcases how \u2013 when appropriately ]_\n\n_used \u2013 technology can be a significant enabler in_\n_strengthening SGBV programming.\u201d_\n\n\nUNHCR staff member\n\n##### Lessons learned and tips for replication\n\n\n- Ensure on-going capacity development activities\nfor frontline workers such as regular refresher\ncourses on safe referrals and use mobile app to\nregularly coach frontline workers.\n\n\n- Ensure that the app remains relevant and\nregularly update it with guidance and resources.\n\n\n- The development of the app should be done\nunder the umbrella of SGBV coordination forum,\nand Inter-Agency sector coordinators can also\nplay a key role in disseminating the app within the\nwider humanitarian community.\n\n\n- Engaging refugee and host community youth, and\ncommunity members who are perceived as role\nmodels within their community is an effective\nway to disseminate stories/messages, raise\nawareness and developing materials which are\nuploaded on the app.\n\n\n- Consultation with the humanitarian community,\nrefugee and host community ensures that\ninformation on SGBV services/risk points reaches\nrefugees who are isolated and with specific\nneeds.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 \u00a9 UNHCR/Lilly Carlisle.\n\n##### Next steps\n\n\nIn 2019, the app will be launched, the SGBV\nprevention community groups will be maintained\nand additional community groups to engage men\nwill be established in Mafraq and Amman. The\nfemale youth group in Amman will continue to\ndevelop videos to raise awareness on various type\nof SGBV and reduce stigma faced by survivors in\ntheir communities. The group will also be trained\non the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse\n(PSEA) and encouraged to develop a video informing\nsurvivors about complaints mechanisms and\nencouraging them to report. Trainings for frontline\nworkers and refugee volunteers will continue.\n\n\n##### Story of change\n\nFeedback from refugee communities during\nthe launch events was key in understanding\nchanges. In Zaatari camp, refugees in the\naudience shared that they were moved by the\nplay as it is extremely close to their daily reality\nand highlighted that unfortunately sexual\nharassment is a major concern for women and\ngirls in the camp.\n\n\nMale refugees playing in the play, as well as\nthose watching, also explained that it really\nhelped them develop a sense of empathy for\nfemale refugees subjected to sexual harassment.\nAlthough survivors are generally blamed\nin the camp, the play helped bring positive\nchange as most refugees acknowledged that\ngirls and women should not be blamed for\nsexual harassment. Refugees acknowledged\nthat families have an important role to play to\nsupport survivors.\n\n\nSome also shared that they were previously not\naware that SGBV service providers in the camp\ncould assist survivors of sexual harassment and\nthat they would encourage them to seek help.\nA Syrian refugee man in his forties shared that\nhe would encourage survivors to seek help with\nservice providers; while another man explained\nthat if he witnesses an incident, he would offer\nhis assistance to escort the survivor to the police.\n\n\nA 65-year-old refugee father explained that the\nplay really moved him and that he would try, as\nof now, not to only be a father to his daughters\nbut also a friend to encourage them to ask for\nhis help if they face sexual harassment. Another\nrefugee acknowledged that in the past he\nactually blamed girls for sexual harassment due\nto the clothes they were wearing, nevertheless\nhe explained that the play helped him\nunderstand that only perpetrators should be\nblamed.\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **19**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Context\n\nreturned IDPs in 2018.\n\n\nIn 2017, UNHCR organized focus groups with\ninternally displaced girls and women from the town\nof Kitchanga, Masisi, and in the IDP sites of Kahe\nand Mungote located in the same area. Of particular\nconcern to displaced women and girls was the lack\nof dignified hygiene kits to promote and safeguard\ntheir menstrual hygiene. The lack of hygiene kits\nhas an enormous impact on women and girls\u2019 ability\nto undertake activities during menstruation, such\nas household chores, going to work and attending\nschool. Participants presented the idea of producing\ntheir own cloth sanitary pads. They wanted to\nprovide menstrual hygiene products for themselves\n\n\n**20** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThis idea informed the development of the\nHeshima project, which aimed to reduce exposure\nto SGBV and to contribute to participation and\nempowerment by improving the availability\nof acceptable menstrual hygiene products\nand increasing self-reliance and economic\nempowerment of IDP women and girls.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 UNHCR and partner staff from INTERSOS brainstorm with internally displaced persons and members of the local\ncommunity on marketing ideas for the sale of soaps and sanitary pads produced in the factory. \u00a9 UNHCR/ Natalia Micevic\n\n\n\nThe project required the construction of two\nfactories, one focusing on the production of sanitary\npads, \u201cHESHIMA\u201d, and another one focusing on soap\nproduction named \u201cTuungane Pamoja\u201d. The project\ninvolved 69 participants (F=49 and M=18), with 90\nper cent of participants being internally displaced\npersons and 10 per cent members of the host\ncommunity.\n\n\nThe project-specific objectives were:\n\n\n- to improve the broad availability of acceptable\nmenstrual hygiene kits for displaced women and\ngirls;\n\n\n- to promote self-reliance through production of\nmenstrual hygiene kits;\n\n\n- to establish a safe livelihood programme,\nenabling women to generate income and learn a\nnew skill; and\n\n\n- to ensure respect for the environment and foster\npeaceful coexistence and use locally available\nmaterials.\n\n\n##### Community engagement in project design\n\nTo increase opportunity for engagement and\nsocial cohesion with host community neighbours,\nthe project design also included host community\nmembers (10 per cent). The project was also guided\nby protection principles in its design, such as the\nreduction of risk and the promotion of resilience.\nThe participants were engaged in the planning\ndesign and development processes of the activities\nfrom the beginning, by identifying their needs and\ncapacities, contributing ideas and expectations and\nproviding recommendations at all stages.\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **21**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        20
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "##### Results\n\n**Women and girls\u2019 access to dignified and quality**\n**hygiene products was increased:** acceptance of the\nproduct in the community, in particular its design, is\na key success of the project. The design was adapted\nto a context where women do not necessarily\nalways have access to underwear. Under these\ncircumstances, the HESHIMA sanitary pad was well\nreceived as it adapts to the needs and context.\n\n\n**Capacity was developed and self-reliance was**\n**enhanced:** 67 participants (F=49, M= 18) received\ntraining on producing the sanitary pads and soap\n(27 in the sanitary pad factory and 40 in the soap\nfactory). The 49 women who were trained in this\nalternative income generating activity felt they\nwere provided an alternative to collecting firewood\nand going to work in agricultural fields in remote\nlocations, thereby reducing their risk of exposure\nto SGBV for them and their family members, who\nundertake these activities. The women decided that\nmen could be included in the project as they had the\nnecessary skills for soap making in particular and\nthat it would be valuable.\n\n\nHESHIMA gave a sense of emancipation and\nincrease the self-esteem of the women who\nparticipated in the project. The pride and sense of\ndignity of having an employment was very visible in\ntheir statements.\n\n\n**Social cohesion and positive relations with**\n**host community was enhanced:** the project has\ndemonstrated a positive impact in terms of peaceful\ncoexistence and community cohesion, providing\na space where displaced persons and the host\ncommunity work together and socialize. As one\nparticipant stated: \u201c _We are all brothers and sisters and_\n_we are all equal_ .\u201d [10]\n\n\n10 https://bit.ly/2Y7m6nW.\n\n\n**22** **TURNING LEARNING INTO ACTION**\n\n\n#### _\u201c [The newly built factory is aptly named \u201cTuungane ]_\n\n_Pamoja\u201d which in Swahili means \u201cworking_\n_together.\u201d Elisa, 49, lives in Kahe site in Kitchanga,_\n_DRC with her husband and their 7 children. Having_\n_been displaced multiple times, she is glad to work_\n_here: \u201cLearning to make soap has given me hope_\n_because it will soon give us an income and we can_\n_become self-reliant,\u201d she explains. \u201cI have these_\n_skills forever and if the war ends and I go home, I_\n_can continue making soap.\u201d_\n\n\nTreasurer of the factory\n\n\n**Engagement of the community in information**\n**and awareness was conducted:** 10 awarenessraising sessions on menstrual and general hygiene\nwere held at Mungote and Kahe IDP sites, in the\nKitshanga host community, as well as in schools\nand local churches. Methods for awareness-raising\nincluded radio sketches, flyer promotions and a\nmegaphone campaign. The campaign also included\nmessaging on SGBV prevention and response. These\nactivities reached 5,287 people \u2013 M=693, F=2,375,\n293 boys and 1,926 PoCs.\n\n##### Lessons learned and tips for replication\n\n\n- The legal processes for establishing a start-up\nmust be researched during the inception phase\nand before the design and development.\n\n\n- The design and creation of the sanitary pads\nlocally requires planning, research and availability\nof raw materials, and an environmental and\nhealth analysis.\n\n\n- It is important to conduct a market analysis prior\nto project planning.\n\n\n- Implementing the project through an\norganization that has expertise in incomegenerating projects, start-ups and business\nmodelling, and/or projects focused on economic\ndevelopment, resilience and self-reliance, ensures\nmore effective implementation. The expertise of\nthe partner also enables adequate monitoring\nguidance from UNHCR.\n\n\n- The governance structure for the factory\nworkers needs to be reinforced and supported.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        21
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "\uf030 Project participants in the sanitary materials factory,\nDRC. \u00a9 UNHCR/Natalia Micevic/2018\n\n\nAs a promising practice, each factory works\nas a collective and has a committee consisting\nof a president, a secretary, two treasurers and\nfour advisors. All the decisions are made by the\ncommittee together with the factory participants.\n\n##### Next steps\n\n\nSupporting the participants\u2019 marketing and\nbusiness skills development, supporting them to\nestablish a sales strategy and an internal business\nstructure. The process of obtaining the necessary\nadministrative authorizations for the factories\nwill be pursued and completed in 2019. The\nconstruction of a child-friendly space next to the\nfactories was also planned to allow the participants\u2019\nchildren to be looked after while their parents are\nworking.\n\n\nThe project\u2019s main objective by the end of 2019 is\nfor the participants to achieve self-management\nof the factories, which will include being able to\nindependently handle all the stages of the project\nfrom the purchasing of materials to the production\nof kits, sales and income management.\n\n\n##### Story of change\n\n**Cl\u00e9mence, 20**, who works at the factory\nsewing sanitary kits. After fleeing violence in\nMasisi territory 10 years ago, she settled in\nKitchanga with her family. She spent a year\nin Goma, North Kivu\u2019s provincial capital,\nlearning to sew but couldn\u2019t find work when\nshe returned to Kitchanga. \u201cI love sewing as\nit\u2019s so wonderful to see the fruits of your work\nright away,\u201d she says. \u201cI\u2019m so happy I don\u2019t have\nto stay home with nothing to do anymore as I\nhave a job to go to.\u201d\n\n\n\nSexual and gender based-violence prevention, risk mitigation and response **23**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        22
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "For more information\nCONTACT UNHCR hqsgbv@unhcr.org\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/1b9c5a54-d6c5-399d-b991-aa1c6aba1389/5ec7c0e34.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        23
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_132/raw/doc_132_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,193 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# EMERGING PRACTICES: mental health and **psychosocial support in refugee operations** **during the COVID-19 pandemic**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 1. COVID-19 and the mental health and psychosocial wellbeing **of refugees**\n\nThe COVID-19 pandemic and associated prevention and mitigation activities have major\nconsequences for mental health and psychosocial wellbeing for refugees and other persons\nof concern. Many people who previously coped well, are now less able to cope because\nof the multiple stressors generated by the pandemic. The socio-ecological environment for\nadults and children is profoundly affected: social support systems may become dysfunctional\nor overburdened, caregivers may become sick or die; stress levels increase due to\nmovement restrictions and crowded living conditions; income and livelihood opportunities\nare threatened. Many, particularly women and children, face increased protection risks\nincluding intimate partner violence and sexual abuse and exploitation. People with preexisting mental health conditions may experience a worsening of their condition and have\ndifficulties in accessing appropriate care.\n\nThis document presents a brief overview of how UNHCR adapts its activities for mental\nhealth and psychosocial support (MHPSS) to the changing context of the pandemic. Staff\nof UNHCR and partners, in country offices in all regions of the world, have developed\ninnovative field practices to continue providing essential MHPSS services to refugees. The\nexamples in this document are testimony to the commitment and creativity of our staff and\ncan serve as inspiration and encouragement for others to continue integrating MHPSS in the\nhumanitarian work during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.\n\n\nEMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 2. UNHCR\u2019s approach to mental health and psychosocial **support for persons of concern**\n\nMHPSS consists of a wide range of activities to protect or promote psychosocial well-being\nor prevent or treat mental health conditions. MHPSS interventions are implemented in public\nhealth, protection or education services. The delivery of these activities is often represented\nin a pyramid of multi-layered services and support (see box 1).\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n### 3. Adaptation of MHPSS services in the pandemic\n\nDuring the pandemic, it is critical that people with MHPSS problems receive support. This\nrequires new interventions and novel ways of service delivery. Existing MHPSS activities\nneed to be carefully reviewed to define how essential they are to reduce symptoms/suffering\nand to maintain functionality of service users. During periods of movement restrictions and\nlockdowns, activities that are less essential need to be scaled down or stopped.\n\n\n**BOX 2 | Adaptions of humanitarian MHPSS services during the COVID-19 pandemic**\n\n\u22b2 Deliver messages, in appropriate languages with context-appropriate dissemination\nmethods, on strategies for maintaining psychosocial wellbeing, managing anxiety,\nactivities at home, and good parenting.\n\n\u22b2 Reduce activities involving face-to-face contact.\n\n\u22b2 Consider stopping group activities or reducing the size of groups maintaining physical\ndistancing and hygiene.\n\n\u22b2 Adapt services, with prioritization of care for people with moderate to severe mental\nhealth conditions. In case of lockdown: Provide direct clinical services with appropriate\nprotection against COVID-19 infection) when they are important for survival and/or for\nthe reduction of severe symptoms and suffering.\n\n\u22b2 Make individual safety plans with service users who have increased risks for COVID-19\nrelated to health complications and/or protection risks.\n\n\u22b2 Train facility-based MHPSS staff in remote delivery of services, including psychological\ntherapies.\n\n\u22b2 Train community-based staff for potential new or expanded roles.\n\n\u22b2 Set up systems for remote supervision and technical support.\n\n\u22b2 Strengthen links with protection services: increased COVID-19-related medical issues\nsuch as hospital admissions may lead to an increase in psychosocial problems, e.g.\ndue to family separations and stigma.\n\n\u22b2 Implement plans for personal protection of staff who continue to have direct contact\nwith service users.\n\n\nAdapted from: IASC (2020). Operational considerations for multisectoral mental health and psychosocial support\nprogrammes during the COVID-19 pandemic.\n\n\nDetailed guidance and tips on adapting MHPSS services in humanitarian settings can be\nfound in the interagency guidance from the IASC (2020) [Operational considerations for](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/operational)\n[multisectoral mental health and psychosocial support programmes during the COVID-19](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/operational)\n[pandemic.](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/operational)\n\n\n\nMHPSS cuts across sectors. Humanitarian actions and interventions will impact the\nmental health and psychosocial wellbeing of refugees in many ways. Therefore, UNHCR\ndistinguishes between a [\u2018MHPSS approach and \u2018MHPSS interventions\u2019](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/health/525f94479/operational-guidance-mental-health-psychosocial-support-programming-refugee.html)\n\n\u22b2 Adopting an _MHPSS approach_ means providing a humanitarian response in ways\nthat are beneficial to mental health and psychosocial wellbeing. This is relevant to\neveryone who assists refugees. Using an MHPSS approach does not necessarily\nmean that humanitarian actors should do diferent things; rather that they do things\ndiferently.\n\u22b2 _MHPSS interventions_ consist of activities with the explicit goal to improve the mental\nhealth and psychosocial wellbeing of refugees. MHPSS interventions are usually\nimplemented by health, protection and education actors.\n\n\n\n2 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 4. How UNHCR integrates MHPSS within the COVID-19 **response**\n\nUNHCR integrates mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) within its activities for\nhealth, protection (e.g. community-based protection, SGBV, child protection) and education\nthrough direct implementation or through partners. Examples of adaptations and new\nactivities include both using MHPSS approaches in the COVID-19 response as well as\ndevelopment/adaptation of MHPSS interventions.\n\n\n**4.1 Community messaging about coping with distress**\n\nThe pandemic and the related public health measures have created high levels of stress\nall over the world. The overflow of information, sometimes contradictory or false, can\nfuel stress levels. It is important to communicate clearly about risks and ways people\ncan protect themselves. The messages should contain information about promoting\nmental health and wellbeing: strategies to manage distress, ways to continue activities at\nhome and tips for parenting and healthy coping. Such messages should be delivered in\nappropriate languages using contextually relevant dissemination methods.\n\nCountry examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Tanzania, IRC in partnership with Radio Kwizera, one of the most popular Kiswahili\nradio stations in the Kigoma region, disseminated mental health messaging to\npromote positive coping mechanisms. The messaging uses jingles, educational\ndramas, and live interviews with psychologists.\n\n\u22b2 In Bangladesh, UNHCR in cooperation with Translators without Borders, made audio\n[versions of the interagency children\u2019s book \u2018My hero is you\u2019 to help children learn](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/my-hero-you)\nabout COVID-19 and understand how they can assist in combatting the virus. The\naudio recordings in Rohingya, Burmese and Bangla languages are used by community\noutreach volunteers through their smart phones in sessions with families (in small\ngroups ensuring physical distancing) and in psycho-education sessions with children.\n\n\u22b2 In the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, UNHCR and partners prepared key messages on\nmental health and wellbeing, communicated during interactive live radio broadcasts.\nTips and advice about well-being were translated to different Kurdish dialects.\n\n\n**4.2 Training first responders in Psychological First Aid and basic psychosocial**\n**skills**\n\nPeople in stressful situations or who are confronted with threatening events may display\nmany different emotional reactions including fear, anger, sadness or withdrawal. The way\npeople respond to others in distress can make a major difference. Psychological First\nAid (PFA) is a set of skills to provide supportive and practical help to people suffering\ncrisis events. The principles of PFA need to be adapted to the COVID-19 context in which\nhelpers must provide support while keeping distance or working remotely. In many\ncountries, UNHCR and partners have organized trainings and workshops for medical\npersonnel, protection staff, outreach volunteers and other frontline workers to build basic\npsychosocial helping skills to people directly or indirectly affected by COVID-19.\n\n\n\nCountry examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Niger, more than 300 responders (UNHCR and partners) were trained in\nPsychological First Aid through online sessions.\n\n\u22b2 In Peru, UNHCR staff working on the newly established telephone hotline were trained\nin remote Psychological First Aid.\n\n\u22b2 In Egypt, a rise in anxiety and depression among refugees has been observed,\nparticularly due to the challenging socio-economic conditions. UNHCR Egypt\norganized trainings for volunteers and community leaders to prepare them in delivery\nof psychological first aid and nonspecialized psychosocial support.\n\n\n**4.3 Providing psychological support through helplines**\n\nIn order to keep in contact with persons of concern and to link those in need to available\nservices, many UNHCR operations have set up or expanded telephone help lines. Some\nof these helplines have a generic switchboard function (people can call with all kinds\nof questions) while others are more specifically meant for people with psychological\ndifficulties. In both types of helplines, staff need to be able to handle calls from people\nwith strong emotions: people who are anxious, angry, sad or despairing. In some cases,\npeople can be aggressive, consider self-harm, or think of suicide. Workers in helplines\nneed to have a good overview of existing MHPSS services to refer to and be able to\nmake a plan of action in case of mental health emergencies.\n\nSome country examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Uganda, the staff of the national interagency helpline (Feedback, Referral and\nResolution Mechanism - FRRM) are trained to answer and discuss issues around\nemotional wellbeing.\n\n\u22b2 In Ecuador, UNHCR established 15 information and emergency hotlines \u2013 including\na national chatbot - who constantly share key messages on access to basic services,\nhumanitarian assistance and MHPSS messages.\n\n\u22b2 In Iraq, UNHCR\u2019s MHPSS staff provided training on remote psychosocial support\nduring the COVID-19 pandemic to the helpline operators of the Iraq Information\nCenter, a nation-wide interagency humanitarian telephone service that provides\ninformation and referral assistance to IDPs and refugees.\n\n\n**4.4 Increasing capacity to provide psychological therapies for refugees with**\n**mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress and**\n**bereavement**\n\nThe provision of psychotherapy during COVID-19 situations is often difficult due to\nmovement restriction and physical distancing. Group-based therapies may have to\nbe stopped or to continue in adapted forms (for example with smaller group sizes).\nIf person-to-person delivery of psychological therapies continues, specific measures\nmust be taken to prevent transmission during consultations. It is possible to provide\npsychotherapy online, but this requires adaptions by the therapist and sometimes clients\nneed support to use such services.\n\n\n\n4 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "mental health messaging",
-          "confidence": 0.8763580322265625,
-          "start": 216,
-          "end": 219
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "audio recordings",
-          "confidence": 0.6923063397407532,
-          "start": 289,
-          "end": 291
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Bangladesh",
-          "confidence": 0.640086829662323,
-          "start": 241,
-          "end": 242
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "key messages on\nmental health and wellbeing",
-          "confidence": 0.8573130965232849,
-          "start": 339,
-          "end": 346
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "Tips and advice about well-being",
-          "confidence": 0.8432300090789795,
-          "start": 354,
-          "end": 359
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.7197110056877136,
-          "start": 335,
-          "end": 336
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Kurdistan Region of Iraq",
-          "confidence": 0.8932080268859863,
-          "start": 330,
-          "end": 334
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Country examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Lebanon, psychologists of UNHCR partner RESTART are trained in new ways of\nworking: from in-person group counselling to individual psychotherapies that can be\ndelivered remotely through telephone and Skype if needed.\n\n\u22b2 In Colombia, UNHCR provides psychosocial care for refugees and migrants in the\nborder area with Venezuela by telephone and face-to-face including people with\ndisabilities. They are referred for face to face consultations when necessary, to\nhospital level mental health services, psychiatric assessment and access to controlled\nmedications.\n\n\u22b2 In Tunisia, asylum seekers and refugees can access psychosocial counselling services\nthrough phone and videocalls, with up to three MHPSS sessions per week.\n\n\n**4.5 Ensuring continuous care for persons with moderate to severe mental**\n**health conditions**\n\nPerson with moderate to severe mental health conditions should have access to clinical\nand other services, which may be provided in primary health care facilities by trained\nand supervised health workers, or in dedicated mental health programmes. Some\nservices can be delivered through remote support, but in many cases, it is important that\ndirect person-to-person support continues to be provided in safe ways. This can be done\nby more extensive use of community-based workers and by adapting facility-based care\nto prevent infections.\n\nCountry examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Gambella, Ethiopia, UNHCR\u2019s partner International Medical Corps suspended\nmost facility-based activities for mental health and psychosocial support and focuses\non home visits for people with severe and complex problems. Many services user\nreceived two months\u2019 supply of medication, in order to reduce the need for clinic visits\nand face-to-face contact.\n\n\u22b2 In Zambia, the restrictions on large gatherings forced UNHCR Zambia to cancel\nplanned refresher trainings for primary health care staff who had previously been\ntrained in the identification and management of priority mental health conditions\nthrough the mhGAP programme. Instead of having one training for all participants in a\ncentral location, the two trainers from the National Mental Health Resources Centre in\nLusaka travelled to the three settlements to provide on the job supervision and train\nparticipants in smaller groups with physical distancing and other protective measures.\nThe training was adapted to include COVID-19 related mental health issues.\n\n\u22b2 In the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, when movement restrictions prevented the consulting\npsychiatrists to perform their weekly clinics in some of the camps, continuity of care\nwas ensured through video psychiatric consultations with the support of camp based\nMHPSS staff.\n\n\n\n**4.6 Ensuring that person with severe protection risks continue to receive**\n**psychosocial support**\n\nIn any humanitarian setting, people in difficult situations that cause additional protection risks\nneed to be offered psychosocial support. Examples are people in detention, SGBV survivors,\nunaccompanied or separated children and survivors of torture. In the context of COVID-19,\nthose in quarantine or isolation often have additional risks. They often have challenges\nto access MHPSS services due to the combination of COVID-19 risks and protection risks.\nTherefore, additional measures to provide such services are warranted and many UNHCR\noperations have found ways to do this.\n\nCountry examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Colombia, the work of the Regional Safe Space Network (RSSN) along the border\nwith Venezuela continued with services to SGBV survivors provided by telephone\nand in-person in safe shelters. In these homes, a psychologist provides in-person\npsychosocial support to women who are victims of trafficking.\n\n\u22b2 In Niger, MHPSS staff is present in the quarantine and isolation sites to support\npsychosocial needs of affected persons and families.\n\n\u22b2 In Syria, the home-based training programme for older persons was adapted to a\nremote modality. Volunteers established remote communication channels with the\nolder persons through phone or social media platforms. See case history in box 3.\n\n\n**BOX 3 | Fadwa\u2019s story (Syria)**\n\nOne of the volunteers in the home-based training programme for older persons in Syria\nprovided support to Fadwa, a 71-year-old Syrian woman who had previously been displaced\nand has gone through many traumatic events in her life including the violent death of her\ndaughter and her family. The two grandchildren who survived were now living with Fadwa\nwho felt very responsible for them; Fadwa was constantly worried about her grandchildren\nand what should happen to them if she would get infected. This caused her sleeping\nproblems and feelings of anger and irritation. The volunteer who contacted Fadwa, realized\nhow stressed she was and provided her with information about common psychological\nreactions to the COVID-19 situation. Fadwa was also referred to a psychosocial case\nmanager for counselling. The case manager helped her identify her feelings and worked\nwith her on healthy coping mechanisms and how to include her grandchildren in activities\nsuch as light physical exercises, cooking and reading. Fadwa was also linked to in-kind\nassistance, where she was provided with a hygiene kit containing disinfectants, detergents\nand other cleaning materials. The state of distress subsided and when Fadwa was asked for\nfeedback on the programme, she said _\u201cI have overcome my fears because you took care of_\n_me and showed me how to take care of myself, which made me feel that I am not alone and_\n_that I am surrounded by friends_ \u201d. Fadwa and her grandchildren are still being followed up\nand supported.\n\n\n\n6 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**4.7 Attention for mental health and wellbeing of refugees supporting others**\n**in their community**\n\nIt is essential to pay attention to the mental health and wellbeing of all responders, including\nrefugees who work as volunteers. Many local UNHCR offices and partners have taken\nmeasures to provide mental health and psychosocial support for humanitarian responders.\n\nCountry examples:\n\n\u22b2 In Egypt, the staff of UNHCR\u2019s partner PSTIC are almost all refugees themselves.\nDuring the pandemic, the organization continues to offer their workers support,\nongoing training, and appreciation. A daily \u2018Corona Newsletter\u2019 gives workers updates\nabout the virus. A Facebook \u2018fun page\u2019 is filled daily with jokes and workers lead a\nnightly DJ or comedy show. To ensure support and maintain quality of care, workers\nare divided into teams that talk daily on WhatsApp groups and meet on Zoom to\nconfidentially discuss cases. All psychosocial workers have regular individual online\nsupervision and a monthly online team support group.\n\n\u22b2 In Niger, a national staff member called a colleague and indicated she was very\nstressed, and not able to sleep or eat well. She had continuous palpitations and\ndizziness, all following the discovery that her father had tested positive for COVID-19.\nShe had become very frightened of the idea that she might have contracted COVID-19\nherself, and, contrary stated to visit various clinics from where she was sent away.\nShe felt rejected and stigmatized. A colleague talked with her through telephone at\nlength and this regular peer support helped her overcome her stress and manage the\nsituation.\n\n\u22b2 In Iraq, after noticing the increased needs among partner staff in the refugee camps,\npsychosocial support sessions were organized for them by the MHPSS Community\nWorkers who are themselves residents of the camps and had been trained in\nproviding psychological support.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### 5. Spotlights: country examples from work of UNHCR and **partners worldwide**\n\n\n\nadapted forms. For example, HIAS staff, with support of UNHCR, partnered with a local\nradio station to provide public messages, to facilitate radio discussions on COVID-19, and\naudio drama sketches. The new way of working was hard for staff and volunteers, but\noverall experiences are positive and have empowered the refugee volunteers.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n10 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "respond to crisis situations including acute suicidality, substance use and family violence.\n\n\nRefugee psychosocial workers divide their clients into groups: those who need a daily call,\nthose who need a call a few times a week, those who need a weekly call and clients who\ncould call when they wanted support. Those calls were often difficult since many refugees\nwere frightened and worried due to major financial challenges: many fear they cannot pay\nthe rent for their apartment.\n\n\nThe COVID-19 situation also led to new initiatives like Whats App discussion groups about\nmaintaining your mental health; a Facebook page on self-care and parenting; availability of\ntele-support in 12 languages; and an online support and activities for parents with children\nwith special needs.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nand parenting skills. Refugee volunteers also prepared home-based videos, virtual games,\nand voice recordings over WhatsApp with information on COVID-19, including the\nimportance of taking care of one\u2019s mental health.\n\n\n**Training first responders in Psychological First Aid:** UNHCR had already provided\nPsychological First Aid (PFA) training to frontline staff (registration staff, hotline operators,\nprotection staff), to help them deal with displays of strong emotions during interviews and\ncounselling. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, partners provided additional trainings\non remote delivery of PFA.\n\n\n_**Community engagement:**_ New community groups and community health volunteers were\nformed within informal settlements and collective shelters to support communities to take\non a leading role in their own safety and wellbeing during the pandemic.\n\n\n_**Strengthening remote helping:**_ The UNHCR national call centre and additional regional\nlines remain open. All staff of hotlines and call centres received training on remote\ncounselling and are updated on a regular basis on information regarding COVID-19 and the\navailability of services. UNHCR also cooperates with Embrace, the national helpline for\nemotional support and suicide prevention in Lebanon. Implementing partners, such as IRC,\nCaritas, and INTERSOS provide trainings on remote psychological support, counselling and\ncase management to their staff.\n\n\n_**Ensuring care for and protection of persons with severe mental health conditions and**_\n_**protection risks:**_ In order to ensure care for persons with severe mental health conditions,\nUNHCR implementing partners identify people at high risk and hold face-to-face sessions\nwith them, while taking precautionary measures. Due to the safety measures of the\ngovernment, mental health hospitals had stopped admitting new patients. However,\nfollowing strong advocacy of UNHCR Lebanon, some major institutions have agreed to\nadmit refugees with severe mental health conditions after taking all the necessary\nprecautionary measures.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n12 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic** 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **UNHCR Guidance around MHPSS**\n\n\u22b2 UNHCR (2013) [Operational Guidance for Mental Health and Psychosocial Support](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/health/525f94479/operational-guidance-mental-health-psychosocial-support-programming-refugee.html)\n[Programming in Refugee Operations;](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/health/525f94479/operational-guidance-mental-health-psychosocial-support-programming-refugee.html)\n\n\u22b2 UNHCR (2017) [Community-Based Protection & Mental Health & Psychosocial Support;](https://www.refworld.org/docid/593ab6add.html)\n\n\u22b2 UNHCR (2018) [Mental health and psychosocial support entry in Emergency Handbook;](https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/49304/mental-health-and-psychosocial-support)\n\n\u22b2 UNHCR (2019) [UNHCR\u2019s approach to mental health and psychosocial support in](http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR%27s%20approach%20to%20mental%20health%20and%20psychosocial%20support%20in%20displacement-2019.pdf)\n[displacement.](http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR%27s%20approach%20to%20mental%20health%20and%20psychosocial%20support%20in%20displacement-2019.pdf)\n\n\u22b2 UNHCR (2020) Thematic report, Mental health and psychosocial response during\nCOVID-19 outbreak in the MENA region, UNHCR MENA Protection Service, June 2020.\n\n### **Interagency Guidance around MHPSS in COVID-19**\n\n\n\u22b2 IASC (2020) [Operational considerations for multisectoral mental health and](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/operational)\n[psychosocial support programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contains detailed](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/operational)\nguidance and tips on adapting MHPSS services in humanitarian settings. Was\nprepared by a group of 26 NGOs and UN agencies that was chaired by UNHCR. It\ncontains practical guidance around the adaption of MHPSS services and provides.\n\n\u22b2 IASC (2020). [Basic Psychosocial Skills- A Guide for COVID-19 Responders. An](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/basic-psychosocial)\nillustrated book to support staff and volunteers in the COVID-19 response in coping\nwith the stresses of the pandemic and effectively supporting others.\n\n\n\n\n\n16 EMERGING PRACTICES: **mental health and psychosocial support in refugee operations during the COVID-19 pandemic**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Fifteen-year-old asylum-seeker Luisa**\n**uses the educational and psychological**\n**materials provided by UNHCR partner**\n**Casa del Migrante in Guatemala City.**\n**Luisa has been depressed, lost her**\n**appetite and is having trouble sleeping**\n**because of the COVID-19 movement**\n**restrictions imposed soon after she and**\n**her family arrived in Guatemala from**\n**another Central American country.**\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR/Alexis Masciarelli\n\n\n**MORE INFORMATION**\n\n\nUNHCR Public Health Section,\n\nDivision of Resilience and Solutions,\n\nUNHCR Geneva, **hqphs@unhcr.org**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4fb6076f-46e3-343d-94f3-cd5e688777ca/5ee2409b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_133/raw/doc_133_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,153 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "### IN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT ON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### INTRODUCTION\n\nWithin UNHCR public health covers various areas including primary health\ncare, nutrition and food security, reproductive health and HIV, mental\nhealth and integrated refugee Health Information Systems (iRHIS). Sectoral\nprogramming in a comprehensive response context means applying a wholeof-government (i.e. relevant national and local authorities for health and\nnutrition response) multi-stakeholder approach and planning with relevant\npartners. The overall responsibility of coordinating the health sector\nresponse in refugee-only situations will be with the Ministry of Health, with\nsupport of UNHCR and relevant partners. A wide range of partners play\na role in planning and delivering public health interventions in different\nareas and at different stages of the refugee response. For an effective and\ncomprehensive response it is therefore essential to know how and when to\nengage these various partners. Though the establishment of refugee-specific\nservices may be needed in the early phases of a refugee situation, longer\nterm solutions are required to ensure that refugees have access to services\nthrough the national health system. Host countries may require assistance\nfrom other partners, including international organizations but also local\npartners, to make the necessary adjustments to comprehensively include\nrefugee health needs into national development and local health plans,\nto strengthen/reinforce national and local resilience of national and local\nhealth systems to meet the health needs of refugees and host communities.\n\n\n### OBJECTIVES OF HEALTH AND NUTRITION PROGRAMMING AS PART OF COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES\n\n## **1.**\n\nRefugees have access to quality, comprehensive health and nutrition\nservices from the onset of the emergency to stabilization which\naddress the main causes of morbidity and mortality, including\nthe needs of the most vulnerable and marginalized.\n\n## **2.**\n\nInclusion of refugees into the national / development response in\nthe health sector is accelerated as part of global efforts towards\nuniversal health coverage (UHC) as per the United Nations 2030\nAgenda for Sustainable Development (\u201cleave no one behind\u2019\u2019).\n\n## **3.**\n\nNational health systems are strengthened at the local and national level.\n\n## **4.**\n\nHost communities benefit from improved access to quality health\nservices alongside refugees in an equitable manner.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### UNDERLYING POLICIES/PRINCIPLES/STANDARDS\n\n\u00bb \u00bb UNHCR\u2019s global public health strategy 2019-2023 (forthcoming) aims to ensure\nthat all refugees are able to exercise their **rights** in accessing life-saving and\nessential health care, mental health, HIV prevention, protection and treatment,\nreproductive health and nutrition services.\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb UNHCR promotes **Universal Access** to Health Care and Equity Principles in\nsupport of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 and 3 and through a **primary**\n**health care (PHC)** approach embedded into the national public health system.\nWhile supporting global efforts towards UHC, access to primary health care\nand to cost effective interventions at secondary health care level will take\nprecedence over long term and costly secondary and tertiary care, and be based\non country level standard operating procedures for referral care [1] .\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb Wherever **National Health Service delivery programmes** are available, these\nare preferred to setting up parallel services for refugees. In emergencies and\nin refugee camp situations, UNHCR and partners may have to establish health\ncentres, due to lack of availability or poor absorption capacity of the national\nhealth care system. These health centres should be integrated, and where\nfeasible, accredited by the Ministry of Health and be part of the national health\nsystem. Structures, equipment and design should be in line with the national\nstandards for health facilities to avoid the need for expensive rehabilitation/\nupgrade of facilities during the handover phase.\n\n\n1 UNHCR\u2019s Principles and Guidance for referral Health Care for Refugees and Other Persons of Concern. UNHCR, 2009.\n\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb UNHCR works to ensure that refugees have access to health and nutrition\nservices at **equal levels** and at similar costs to that of nationals of the host\ncommunity once ensuring that minimum standards have been met.\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb Effective **coordination** between the Ministry of Health (MoH) and other line\nministries is of paramount importance including in exploring opportunities for\nintegration of services.\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb Not all refugee situations start with an influx, and all emergency responses need\nto transform into a more consolidated and stable programmatic response in\nthe mid- to long-term. This would include seeking the engagement of relevant\nnational and local government authorities and development actors. The Global\nCompact on Refugees envisages that refugee responses would be designed in a\nmanner that would pave the way for more **sustainable support and responses**,\nwhere possible, integrating responses for refugees into national systems while\nensuring these are adequately supported.\n\n\n\u00bb **Regardless of the location** \u00bb (camp, settlement, out of camp, urban [2], rural etc.), it\nis critical to ensure (and support directly if necessary) refugee access to quality\nhealth services and means to meet their basic needs. Advocate to ensure that\nexisting social protection systems (including cash-based transfers as part of\nsocial safety nets) are available for vulnerable refugees so that they can access\nservices equitably.\n\n\n2 Ensuring access to health care: Operational guidance on refugee protection and solutions in urban areas. UNHCR, 2011.\n\n\n\nIN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT\nON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES\n\n\u00bb \u00bb States are primarily responsible for ensuring refugees are protected.\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb UNHCR retains the overall accountability for Persons of Concern\n\n\n\u00bb \u00bb UNHCR\u2019s role includes the following key elements:\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 **Coordination:** As the agency ultimately responsible for refugee responses,\nUNHCR has a role in coordinating UN and partner responses for refugees\nincluding convening and catalysing the engagement of a broader array of\nstakeholders in line with the GCR.\n\n\n4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND NUTRITION\n\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 Ensuring that **protection considerations** are taken into account in the healthrelated interventions of the refugee response, including those of partners\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 **Advocacy and technical support to legislative, policy or strategy changes**\nwhere relevant, to facilitate **inclusion in national systems and plans** : UNHCR\nadvocates with relevant counterparts (Ministries, UN) to include refugees in\nhealth service delivery at national and local levels, and in national planning\ndocuments (National development plans (NDP) and support frameworks\nsuch as UN Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF).\nWhen needed and feasible, UNHCR to work with relevant partners [relevant\nline ministries, international organizations such as WHO and local partners]\nwho would provide support to host governments to strengthen national\nhealth systems and health service provision.\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 Ensuring that a **situation analysis and mapping of relevant actors**\n(Government, UN agencies, NGOs, multilaterals and donors) in the health\nsector is done in collaboration with the line ministry to inform the design of a\nresponse in each area of public health and nutrition and for every stage of the\nresponse.\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 **Facilitating data driven responses** Facilitate and support the collection,\ncompilation, analysis, interpretation and dissemination of health program\ndata. Support inclusion of refugees in national data systems and tools\nincluding disaggregation of data by nationality to the extent possible.\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 **Refugee participation and consultation** : wherever possible, continue to\ndevelop and support consultative processes that enable refugees and host\ncommunity members to assist in designing appropriate, accessible and\ninclusive responses.\n\n\n\u2013\u2013 **Providing technical expertise & support** : UNHCR will seek to provide\nor facilitate technical and general support to partners on program\nimplementation and support for inclusion of refugees in national data\nsystems..\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "health program\ndata",
-          "confidence": 0.9947885274887085,
-          "start": 331,
-          "end": 334
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.677581250667572,
-          "start": 407,
-          "end": 408
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9903178215026855,
-          "start": 338,
-          "end": 339
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### TIMELINE AND SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS [3]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3 Inclusion is cross-cutting and starts at onset of the response planning and should be gradually and contextually formulated as per guidance in this document.\n\n4 New arrival, wide-age-range vaccination, screening for and treatment of acute malnutrition, management of injuries, prioritized reproductive health services etc.\n\n5 For example, where national services are not nearby or do not have the capacity or unable to meet the particular needs of refugees such as specific mental health services or sexual and gender-based violence services\n\n\nIN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT\nON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "6 PUBLIC HEALTH AND NUTRITION\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### OVERALL RESPONSIBILITIES OF VARIOUS ACTORS [6]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n6 Inclusion is cross-cutting and starts at onset of the response planning and should be gradually and contextually formulated as per guidance in this document.\n\n7 In some contexts where refugees represent a large proportion of the population, particularly where there is reason to suspect that coverage may be different among this group, oversampling may be considered to provide estimates for both the displaced persons and\nthe host population\n\n\nIN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT\nON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "8 PUBLIC HEALTH AND NUTRITION\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**PREPAREDNESS** **EMERGENCY** **TRANSITION** **LONG-TERM INCLUSION**\n\n\nAs above Comprehensive nutrition services integrated as much as possible into MoH systems (often supported by UNICEF in collaboration with UNHCR).\n\n\nNutrition assessments of refugees and national populations.\n\n\nPrevention of acute malnutrition, anaemia and stunting by gradually integrating refugees into national programmes of fortification, deworming and supplementation as well\nas close nutritional monitoring. If need be in collaboration with UNICEF, WFP and other partners for human resources, nutritional supplies and equipment.\n\n\nAdvocate for eligible refugees to receive therapeutic feeding products (ready-to-use therapeutic food, F75, F100) and medications (systemic treatment and ReSoMal) through\nnational system.\n\n\nEngage UN agencies (UNICEF, WFP) to support treatment and prevention of acute and other forms of malnutrition.\n\n\nEngage supervision from MoH on nutrition service provision.\n\n\nInclude refugees in national Vitamin A, deworming, school feeding and micronutrient fortification programmes.\n\n\nPrevention of micronutrient deficiencies and anaemia by gradually integrating refugees into national programmes of Vitamin A supplementation, deworming, school\nfeeding and micronutrient fortification programmes as well as close nutritional monitoring and enhanced collaboration with reproductive health programmes. If need be in\ncollaboration with UNICEF, WFP and other partners for human resources, nutritional supplies and equipment.\n\n\nInclude refugee nutrition programme staf (government and local partners) in national capacity building programmes for improved/integrated health and nutrition services.\n\n\n\nAs above Infant and young child feeding in emergencies (IYCF-e).\n\n\nPrioritize life-saving IYCF activities (defined by context)\nand advocate for needs of infants and pregnant and\nlactating women to be considered in all sectors.\n\n\nReference: UNHCR/Save the Children IYCF in Refugee\nSituations: A Multi-Sectoral Framework for Action.\n\n\n\nMulti-sectoral integrated IYCF programmes. Engage other sectors e.g. WASH, camp management, security,\nsettlement and shelter, health, food security and livelihoods, logistics, child protection, general coordination.\n\n\nBuilding systems and capacity to promote IYCF support (often in collaboration with UNICEF).\n\n\nInclude refugees in national IYCF and child health programmes.\n\n\n\nIN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT\nON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**PREPAREDNESS** **EMERGENCY** **TRANSITION** **LONG-TERM INCLUSION**\n\n\nAs above Minimum Initial Service Package for RH (MISP) including Scale up to comprehensive reproductive, HIV/TB health services.\nEmergency Obstetric Care.\n\nAdvocate for inclusion of refugees into national HIV, TB and malaria programmes for provision of ART, malaria\nand TB drugs, rapid testing kits, early infant diagnosis, GENExpert and viral load, bed nets (LLIN) etc. Global\nFund support may be needed including emergency funds for large influxes, reprogramming of existing grants or\ninclusion into new grants. (Reference GFATM\u2019s\u2019 Challenging Operating Environment Policy and UNHCR\u2019s Global\nFramework Agreement).\n\n\nInclude in national cervical cancer screening programmes and obstetric fistula programs where they exist.\n\n\nInclude refugees health workers or staf working in refugees sites in national trainings\n\n\nlevel referral system.\n\n\nAdditional support to referral facilities may be needed in terms of equipment support, payment of referral costs\n\n\n\n|As above|Life-saving referral care and logistics support.|\n|---|---|\n|As above|Identifcation of NCD patients & ensure continuity of<br>care.<br>Support training/refreshment of health providers on NCD<br>updated protocols.<br>Prioritize patients considered to be at higher risk<br>of complications \u2013 symptomatic; those for whom<br>medication interruption is likely to have signifcant<br>consequences; those who have had recent disease<br>instability; and those with multiple co-morbidities.|\n\n\n10 PUBLIC HEALTH AND NUTRITION\n\n\n\nIntegrate NCD care into primary health care and ensure congruence with the national health system.\n\n\nAdvocate for inclusion into existing national NCD services and programs.\n\n\nIn the absence of functioning local facilities, identifying and supporting a reliable health partner is important and,\nequally, referral systems should be established where specific care is not provided directly by the health partner.\n\n\nSupport the local health system to maintain and enhance their NCD services.\n\n\nReference: NCDs in Humanitarian Settings- Operational guidelines (contact UNHCR Public Health Section).\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**PREPAREDNESS** **EMERGENCY** **TRANSITION** **LONG-TERM INCLUSION**\n\n\n\nAs above\n\n\nPromote the dissemination and use of\ninternational guidance documents such\nas IASC Guidelines for Mental Health\nand Psychosocial Support (MHPSS) and\nmental health entries in Sphere Minimum\nStandards and UNHCR Emergency\nHandbook.\n\n\nReview national health plans and policies\nand advocate that activities for refugees\nare included and equitably provided as\nnationals.\n\n\nTraining of health workers and other\nrelevant actors on culturally-sensitive\nservice delivery, including interpreters;\nharmonized with health system processes.\n\n\n\nProtect the rights of people with severe mental health\nconditions in the community, hospitals and institutions.\n\n\nOrient staff and volunteers on how to offer\npsychological first aid.\n\n\nMake basic clinical mental healthcare available at every\nhealthcare facility.\n\n\nMake psychological interventions available where\npossible for people impaired by prolonged distress.\n\n\nWork with protection actors to strengthen community\nself-help and social support.\n\n\nComprehensive food security interventions to include\nprovision of blanket assistance to meet basic needs\n(food- in-kind or cash, with partners).\n\n\nJoint Needs/Vulnerability Assessments (refugee/host).\n\n\nNutrition sensitive agriculture, livelihood programmes.\n\n\nDevelopment of Self-Reliance Strategy for food/\nnutrition.\n\n\n\nComprehensive food security interventions to include\nprovision of targeted assistance to meet basic needs\n(food- in-kind or cash, with partners) where government\nsocial protection programmes do not yet include\nrefugees and needs are identified.\n\n\nContinue food security activities as per Self-Reliance for\nfood and nutrition Strategy.\n\n\nLink and support to social protection systems for most\nvulnerable.\n\n\n\nAs in emergency stage PLUS:\n\n\nOrganize a referral mechanism among mental health specialists, general healthcare providers, community-based\nsupport and other services.\n\n\nDevelop plans with the MoH, development donors and NGOs to develop a sustainable mental health system.\n\n\n\nAssessments with line ministries to determine\nvulnerability (poverty and food security).\n\n\nIntegration into government social protection system.\n\n\n\nTraining of refugees on key health and nutrition and Continuous training of health workers in refugee settings linked with MoH national training curricula.\nhygiene promotion messages.\n\n\u0007Support efforts to ensure qualified refugee health workers are able to work similar to national system health\nworkers.\n\n\n\nCapacity/skill building of refugees.\n\n\nIN OPERATIONALIZING THE GLOBAL COMPACT\nON REFUGEES AND COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSES 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/9cb93511-ff30-3831-b43c-845d995e89f6/5fb3ad4d4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_134/raw/doc_134_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,22 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "The _[Three-Year Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5d15db254/three-year-strategy-resettlement-complementary-pathways.html)_ translates the [Global Compact on Refugees (GCR)](https://www.unhcr.org/the-global-compact-on-refugees.html) into\na global plan for action to build the structures to increase the number of resettlement and complementary pathways places.\nIt also seeks to expand the number of engaged countries and improve the availability and predictability of third country\nsolutions for refugees. The Strategy foresees resettlement of one million refugees and admission of two million through\ncomplementary pathways by 2028. More specifically, the Strategy calls for an incremental increase of 10,000 resettlement\nadmissions per year. The global resettlement admissions target was set at 70,000 refugees for 2020 and at 80,000 for 2021.\nIt will be reaching 150,000 refugees by 2028.\n\n\nThe COVID-19 pandemic **had a serious impact with border closure and travel restrictions** and placed a significant obstacle\nin securing third country solutions for refugees in 2020. The pandemic\u2019s toll on European countries has been significant.\nDespite the major challenges caused by COVID-19, EU Member States remained engaged with UNHCR to find ways to\nkeep resettlement programmes running: scores of refugees with emergency protection needs have been able to depart for\nresettlement; and innovative modalities have been adopted to maintain resettlement processing. UNHCR welcomes the\nsupport and assistance provided by EU Member States and local communities to refugees.\n\n\nWith the resumptions of travel and admissions since June 2020, UNHCR stands ready to support States in their efforts.\nUNHCR is very pleased to see several arrivals to EU countries, including from the Niger Emergency Transit Mechanisms and\ncalls on countries to assist and expedite departures in order to continue evacuations from Libya.\n\n\nUNHCR welcomes the Pact on Migration and Asylum and looks forward to working with Member States and the EU.\nThe Pact is a foundation for growing resettlement and complementary pathways in 2021 and beyond in reflection of the\ngoals of the _Three-Year Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways_ .\n\n## I. SOLIDIFYING THE EU\u2019S POSITION AS A LEADER IN RESETTLEMENT\n\n\n- **Recommendation 1: Increase the number of resettlement places:** While the Strategy\u2019s goal for 70,000 refugees to be\nresettled globally in 2020 will not be met, UNHCR asks the EU countries to do everything possible to meet the targets,\nwhether by the end of 2020 or into 2021. UNHCR asks for the 27 EU Member States to admit at least 35,000 refugees\nin 2021, in addition to the 30,000, due to arrive in 2020. This would secure the EU\u2019s contribution of 40 % of global\nresettlement.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 2: Increase the number of resettlement countries:** The Strategy also aspires to increase the number\nof resettlement countries globally to 50 by 2028. In the last two years, only 29 countries received UNHCR resettlement\nsubmissions, which is significantly less than in 2016 with 35 countries. The European Commission\u2019s support will be critical\nto revive lapsed programmes and increase the number of EU resettlement states.\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE EUROPEAN UNION RESETTLEMENT NEEDS AND KEY PRIORITIES FOR 2021 1/2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f42937b4-b6e1-3649-bc00-5c9f4b5812b9/5fb7e43a4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "- **Recommendation 3: Strengthening partnerships and build the capabilities** of actors that can contribute to expanding\nresettlement; engaging actors not traditionally involved in resettlement; strengthening the efficiency of processes and\nimproving data collection to inform evidence-based advocacy.\n\n## II. GLOBAL RESETTLEMENT NEEDS 2021 AND KEY PRIORITY SITUATIONS\n\n\n- **Recommendation 4: Priority situations:** As per the 2021 Projected Global Resettlement Needs (PGRN) more than 1.445\nmillion refugees are in need of resettlement. UNHCR urges EU Member States to focus efforts on refugees along the\n**Central Mediterranean Route,** as well as **in the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) countries,** and **in**\n**the Middle East, with a focus on Syrian refugees.** Additionally, UNHCR calls for **unallocated quotas** that can be used in a\nflexible way for urgent and emergency cases across the globe.\n\n## III. KEY POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n\n- **Recommendation 5: Towards a predictable and sustainable European program:** The EU has taken encouraging steps\nto solidify a predictable and sustainable European programme for providing refugees third country solutions \u2013 with the\ndraft regulation proposing the _**Union Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Framework**_ . UNHCR looks forward to the\nopportunity to consult with the EU and Member States and provide input as the Framework comes closer to becoming a\nreality. The Pact and discussions ahead are also an opportunity to recall the importance of resettlement, and its function\nas a tool to provide protection and a durable solution to refugees.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 6: Enhance collaboration among actors and EASO engagement:** UNHCR welcomes ongoing close\ncollaboration with EASO and the opportunity to participate in EASO\u2019s recent Resettlement and Humanitarian Admissions\nNetwork meetings to maximize information-sharing and coordination among all stakeholders involved.\n\n## IV. COMPLEMENTARY PATHWAYS\n\n\n- **Recommendation 7: Expand and ensure access to Complementary Pathways:** The EU can support the Strategy to\nprovide complementary pathways to two million refugees within the next ten years. Complementary pathways should be\n**in addition** to, not a substitute for resettlement. UNHCR welcomes EU Member States\u2019 initiatives to expand programmes\nand to ensure that these include necessary protection safeguards.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 8: Work with a range of actors to ensure more educational pathways:** UNHCR stands ready to assist\nand work towards expanding partnerships with various stakeholders, including academia, foundations, private sector,\ninternational organizations, universities and civil society for more educational pathways.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 9: Ensure refugees can access labour schemes:** UNHCR welcomes the EU\u2019s support for labour mobility\nas a pathway and calls upon States to exercise flexibility allowing refugees to access already existing labour schemes open\nto foreigners generally.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 10: Engage with civil society on Humanitarian Admission Programmes:** UNHCR calls for States\nto remain engaged with civil society actors responsible for organizing Humanitarian Admission Programs (including\nHumanitarian corridors) so that these efforts align with global resettlement needs and complement the EU and Member\nStates\u2019 larger strategy.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 11: Ensure the right to family unity:** UNHCR calls on EU Member States to preserve the right to\nfamily unity and expand refugees\u2019 access to established procedures that allow refugees to reunite with immediate and\ndependent family members. While the right to family unity is enshrined in international and regional instruments, many\nlegal and administrative obstacles to family reunification remain.\n\n\n- **Recommendation 12: Play an active role in ensuring community sponsorship:** UNHCR encourages the EU\u2019s active\nparticipation in Global Refugee Sponsorship Initiative (GRSI) activities. The EU can play a key role in supporting states\ndraft policy frameworks that support community sponsorship and resolving challenges that inhibit nascent programmes\nfrom reaching maturity.\n\n\nUNHCR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE EUROPEAN UNION RESETTLEMENT NEEDS AND KEY PRIORITIES FOR 2021 2/2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f42937b4-b6e1-3649-bc00-5c9f4b5812b9/5fb7e43a4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_135/raw/doc_135_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,717 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# UGANDA POLICY BRIEF\n\nUSING SOCIOECONOMIC DATA TO PROMOTE EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS FOR\nREFUGEES IN UGANDA\n\n\n_This brief was authored by Theresa Beltramo, Jed Fix and Ibrahima Sarr, UNHCR. The opinions expressed herein_\n_are the authors\u2019 own. They do not necessarily represent the views of UNHCR. We would like to thank Lilian Achieng_\n_Otiego, Miriam Malmqvist David Githiri, Peter Waita, Stefanie Krause, Damalia Zalwago, Jerry Grants Anyoli, Gerald_\n_Peter Emoyo (UNHCR Uganda), Yonatan Araya, Anna Gaunt, M\u00e9lina Djre (UNHCR Regional Bureau Nairobi), and_\n_Craig Loschmann and Rebecca Ong (UNHCR/DRS)._\n\n\n_Empowering young refugees and local youth with job skills at the Sweswe vocational training centre in Kyaka II_\n_Refugee Settlement, south-west Uganda \u00a9 UNHCR/Duniya Aslam Khan_\n\n\n**EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**\n\n\nBetween 1992 to 2013, the percentage of Ugandan households living in poverty fell by half. Despite this\ntremendous progress in poverty reduction, a recent economic slowdown and a sharp increase in youth\nentering the workforce have contributed to weak growth in the labour market. It is against this backdrop\nthat the country\u2019s more than 1 million refugees seek their livelihoods.\n\nJust 29 percent of refugees in Uganda are actively working, versus 64 percent among host communities.\nEven after considering differences in age, gender and education, refugees are 35 percentage points\nless likely than Ugandan nationals to be employed. By comparison, in Europe, the employment gap\nbetween refugees and nationals is 17 percentage points (Fasani, Frattini, and Minale 2018).\n\nSignificant gaps also exist for labour force participation and unemployment rates. Working-age refugees\nare 27 percentage points less likely to participate in the labour market than host community members\n(42 percent and 69 percent, respectively) and 24 percentage points more likely to be unemployed (31\npercent and 7 percent, respectively). This is particularly true among youth (age 14-25 years), where 50\npercent of refugee males and 41 percent of females are unemployed, compared to 14 percent of\nUgandan males and 16 percent of females.\n\nThese trends persist after the initial years of displacement. While employment rates for refugees\ndemonstrate some convergence relative to nationals, significant differences remain a decade after\narrival.\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "employment rates for refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8473777770996094,
-          "start": 394,
-          "end": 398
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "differences in wages received for similar skilled jobs. Among the working population, refugees are 1.75\ntimes more likely than host community members to fall below the poverty line. They earn on average 32\npercent less than Ugandan nationals with similar education.\n\nMany refugees accept employment that is below their skills level, education and pre-displacement\noccupation. Such professional downgrading is widely visible, especially among those with higher levels\nof education. Possible reasons include a lack of recognition of refugee qualifications and poor\ntransferability of skills and professional experience. Discrimination, inconsistency and cost of\ncompliance with local regulations as well as employers\u2019 lack of information about the legal status of\nrefugees have also been shown to contribute (Loiacono and Vargas 2019; Chang 2018). This\novereducation of refugees is costly to individuals and firms, as well as the Ugandan economy more\ngenerally. Implementing policies to address these mismatches can have positive impacts on refugees\u2019\ncontribution to the Ugandan economy.\n\nAmong both groups, younger people face more barriers to employment than older individuals, with\nrefugee youth experiencing more than three times higher unemployment rates than nationals \u2013 44\npercent of refugee youth versus 14 percent of national youth are unemployed. Idle unemployed youth\ncan lead to negative societal outcomes such as alcohol and drug abuse, higher rates of teenage\npregnancy, and other extremist behaviour including violence. The negative consequences of extended\nunemployment and inactivity in early career include financial hardship and lower employment as well as\nlower long-term earnings prospects.\n\nContrary to established findings on the returns to education in employment, the education level and\nemployment rate are inversely related for both refugees and the host community, a phenomenon known\nas the puzzle of the educated unemployed. Among host community members, those who have\nsecondary education levels and some tertiary education have the highest unemployment rate of 11\npercent and 17 percent, respectively. Like hosts, refugees with secondary and some tertiary education\nhave the highest unemployment rates- at 43 percent and 35 percent, respectively. These findings\nindicate the importance of economic policies towards encouraging skilled job growth in Uganda to\naddress unemployment for those with secondary and tertiary education.\n\nWhile refugees with higher education are more likely to be unemployed, they are also more likely to be\nsearching for a job and hence likely to participate in the labour market. Further we find that for both\nrefugees and Ugandans, higher education levels are associated with better employment outcomes. For\nrefugees, paid employment is shown to increase with higher education levels, especially for people who\nhave completed secondary education or higher education. As such, it is essential to address risk factors\nto completing school and improve the low transition rate from primary to secondary school. The\ntransition is limited by a number of factors, the main ones being poor performance on the primary leaving\nexamination that is required to start secondary school; and additionally, the fact that teachers often hold\nstudents back from taking the exam so that they will not fail, which can lead to dropout among students\ndue to declining motivation from lack of advancement. One solution is to assist students in increasing\nthe rigour of exam preparation by providing additional courses and materials. The financial burden of\nschool fees and the opportunity cost of attending school \u2013 that youth cannot work to supplement the\nhousehold income \u2013 are additional constraints, especially for refugees. Granting both tuition and\nconditional cash transfers to families of students who pass the primary leaving exam would help support\nrefugees at risk of not transitioning.\n\nCritical to improving secondary school completion rates is making sure there are enough schools,\nincluding in areas that host refugees. Further, existing secondary programmes for refugees have very\nlimited math and science curriculum, which narrows academic choices and in turn, career options and\nlifetime earnings potential in related fields. There is a need to build infrastructure and facilities that will\nenable math and science classes and attract teachers to less desired locations by exploring, with the\ngovernment, the potential for increasing incentives nationally. Likewise, there is a need to advocate for\nmore boarding facilities, especially for girls, to overcome issues relating to distance of school from home\nand associated threats of violence when walking to and from school.\n\n\nUNHCR 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "as families are more likely to ask girls to work or enter into early marriages. Sustained efforts by UNHCR\nand partners are needed to increase second chance education programmes. Promoting the continued\nuse of radio programmes for classes, even after schools reopen, and expanding online learning will\nensure students are able to maximize their learning. Non-financial incentives should be explored for\nteachers to improve motivation and the quality of teaching in refugee settlements, including potentially\nroom and board and other associated transport, as well as endowments or funds for teachers to design\ncurriculum.\n\nThe data suggests that the level of education required differs across economic sectors and job\ncategories, and that few adolescents complete secondary school. This calls for measures to improve\neducation outcomes, which should support future labour market outcomes. To do so, UNHCR and\npartners should explore programmes that lower or subsidize school fees, create scholarships, and direct\ncash transfers to low-income refugee families to offset the opportunity cost of the student attending\nschool instead of working to provide for the family. Even those refugees who do not continue on to\nhigher levels of education will benefit from basic literacy, numeracy, language, and soft skills followed\nby vocational training. Additional labour market linkage programmes should be explored to improve\nrefugee employment outcomes for all education and skill levels.\n\nAssessing refugees\u2019 skills and facilitating jobs matching soon after arrival, as well as providing timely\ntraining to improve skills, can help refugees get a better employment start and potentially achieve\nquicker convergence in wages between refugees and hosts.\n\nIn the medium-term, implementing a system of recognizing overseas qualifications, especially those\nfrom the region, would facilitate positive employment outcomes for both refugees and hosts. It would\nallow qualified refugees to be considered for jobs that match their skills set, improve wage equity and\nlimit poverty. It would also facilitate the movement of human capital for Ugandans as well as refugees,\nwhich could be particularly important given the country\u2019s large youth population entering the workforce\nand the comparatively slow growth in employment opportunities.\n\nEncouraging government and development actors to provide targeted support to small firms \u2013 including\nself-employed persons \u2013 to grow and increase profitability could increase the demand for skilled jobs.\nEnabling policy measures like improving access to financing can help the self-employed expand their\nbusinesses, which has potentially outsized positive impacts on the economy. Particularly for refugees\u2019\ngreater access to financial capital could help account for the loss of assets due to displacement and\nconstitute a form of insurance in low revenue periods.\n\nWhile Uganda\u2019s generous approach to hosting refugees is well recognized, these labour market\nconditions demonstrate the challenges in achieving refugees\u2019 self-reliance, even in such a liberal policy\nenvironment. Doing so will require additional investments in education, particularly in improving the\ntransition from primary to secondary school and inherently addressing the barriers to quality education\nfor refugees and hosts, particularly in math and science, and barriers to accessing education, particularly\nfor girls. Further, to improve labour market integration, several key activities are needed, including: (i)\nearlier assessment of refugees\u2019 skills; (ii) matching these skills to the job market by providing training\nand jobs matching; and (iii) facilitating recognition of certificates and degree equivalence.\n\n\n**INTRODUCTION**\n\nWith over a million refugees, Uganda is the third largest refugee-hosting nation in the world and the\nlargest in Africa. The country has a generous open-door policy towards displaced persons and its legal\nand policy framework regarding refugees is considered one of the most progressive in the world. Most\nrefugees arrive in Uganda from South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Burundi and\nSomalia.\n\nAccess to gainful employment is a concern of all people living in Uganda. Statistics from 2018 show a\nrural unemployment rate of 9.9 percent and 9.1 percent in urban areas (Uganda Bureau of Statistics\n2018). Refugees are no different than Ugandans in that employment is crucial to their livelihoods,\n\n\nUNHCR 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data",
-          "confidence": 0.8235700130462646,
-          "start": 102,
-          "end": 103
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "refugee settlements",
-          "confidence": 0.6214404106140137,
-          "start": 76,
-          "end": 78
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "only a missed opportunity to contribute to host communities, but also increases the risk of poverty and\npermanent dependence on humanitarian assistance.\n\nThis policy brief provides insight into the labour market behaviour of refugees relative to host communities\nthrough a comprehensive analysis of their labour market performance and potential for convergence over\n[time. We make use of cross-sectional household data from the Uganda Refugee and Host Communities](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/571081569598919068/pdf/Informing-the-Refugee-Policy-Response-in-Uganda-Results-from-the-Uganda-Refugee-and-Host-Communities-2018-Household-Survey.pdf)\n[2018 Household Survey (RHCS), which sampled 2,209 residential households, distributed geographically](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/571081569598919068/pdf/Informing-the-Refugee-Policy-Response-in-Uganda-Results-from-the-Uganda-Refugee-and-Host-Communities-2018-Household-Survey.pdf)\nacross 13 districts in the primary refugee hosting regions in Uganda. As a result, the survey is\nrepresentative of the refugee and host community populations of Uganda at the national level, as well as\nin the regions of West Nile, the Southwest, and the city of Kampala. To track how refugees fare relative\nto Ugandan nationals in the labour market, we consider three primary indicators: employment rate (share\nof working-age population in employment or self-employment); labour force participation rate (share of\nworking-age population employed or seeking employment); and unemployment rate (share of labour\nforce seeking and available for employment).This note generates a profile of households by employment\nstatus and identifies opportunities to improve policies in these areas.\n\n\n**MACROECONOMIC EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT**\n\nIn Uganda, as elsewhere, employment strengthens during periods of economic expansion, and vice\nversa. From 2000-2017, the share of employment elasticity to growth was 0.6, suggesting that a 1\npercentage point increase in economic growth is associated with a 0.6 percentage point increase in\nemployment. The Ugandan employment elasticity of 0.6 is higher than the average in African countries\n(0.41) and very close to the ideal of 0.7 (Coulibaly, Gandhi, and Mbaye 2019).\n\nUganda\u2019s recent decline in economic growth has led to weaker employment. Annual GDP growth slowed\ndown from an average of 4 percent during 2000-2009 to 2 percent during 2010-2017, while the labour\nforce participation decreased from 74 percent and 68 percent, respectively. Meanwhile, the country\u2019s\npopulation grew 3 percent reaching 38.8 million in 2018, with youth making up 55 percent of the total\npopulation, the second highest proportion in the world. While latest estimates by the IMF show more\npositive growth of 6.1 percent for fiscal year 2017/2018, the country remains under pressure to create\njobs to keep up with its growing population. The combined effect of slower economic growth and high\npopulation growth has contributed to significantly lower labour force participation, especially among youth\n(defined as age 14-25 years).\n\nEducational attainment level has an important influence on employment outcomes, including the type of\nemployment. Half of Ugandan nationals with no education could only find seasonal and temporary jobs,\nwhile around 75 percent of employed people with higher education (defined as some secondary school\nor more) have a more stable job lasting all year (IMF 2020). Despite the crucial importance of education\non job prospects, education outcomes in Uganda have deteriorated due to declines in primary and middle\nschool completion rates, contrary to trends in neighbouring countries like Kenya and Rwanda. Barriers to\neducation achievement include the inability to afford tuition (78 percent of male students and 48 percent\nof female students) as well as pregnancy (40 percent of female students) (IMF 2020).\n\nA recent World Bank report found that Uganda will need to create more than 600,000 jobs per year before\n2030 and create more than 1 million jobs per year by 2040 to keep up with the pace of young people\nentering the labour force (Merotto, Weber, and Aterido 2018).\n\n\n_Labour market outcomes for refugees are consistently worse than those of hosts_\n\nDespite the favourable policy environment, the results show that refugees have worse employment\noutcomes than nationals. Only 29 percent of refugees are actively employed, versus 64 percent in host\ncommunities, corresponding to an employment rate gap of 35 percentage points. In contrast, in Europe,\nthe difference in employment rates between natives and refugees is 17 percentage points, less than half\nof the gap seen in Uganda (Fasani, Frattini, and Minale 2018). A recent study confirmed that refugee\nemployment levels in Uganda are surprisingly low compared with Ugandan nationals or refugees in\nneighbouring Kenya (Betts and al. 2019).\n\n\nUNHCR 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2018 Household Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.688108503818512,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 78
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.7235819101333618,
-          "start": 77,
-          "end": 78
-        },
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "RHCS",
-          "confidence": 0.7400532364845276,
-          "start": 79,
-          "end": 80
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.8965787887573242,
-          "start": 75,
-          "end": 76
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.599448025226593,
-          "start": 35,
-          "end": 36
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "employment rate",
-          "confidence": 0.9504996538162231,
-          "start": 168,
-          "end": 170
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.6279070377349854,
-          "start": 239,
-          "end": 240
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.6088356971740723,
-          "start": 332,
-          "end": 333
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "households",
-          "confidence": 0.9240304231643677,
-          "start": 217,
-          "end": 218
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "labour force participation rate",
-          "confidence": 0.6669702529907227,
-          "start": 181,
-          "end": 185
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "share of\nworking-age population employed or seeking employment",
-          "confidence": 0.5948565602302551,
-          "start": 186,
-          "end": 194
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.7056536674499512,
-          "start": 239,
-          "end": 240
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.6038762927055359,
-          "start": 332,
-          "end": 333
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2000-2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7162187099456787,
-          "start": 257,
-          "end": 258
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "households",
-          "confidence": 0.5954484343528748,
-          "start": 217,
-          "end": 218
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "rate. The gap in participation rates between refugees and host community members is significant at 27\npercentage points (42 percent for refugees versus 69 percent rate for host community). Even after\nconsidering differences between refugee and host populations such as age, gender and education, the\ngap remains sizeable at 26 percentage points.\n\nGender differences are also prominent when it comes to economic participation, with the gender gap\namong refugees greater than that among nationals (12 percentage points for refugees, versus 9\npercentage points for host community). Variations are also evident across regions. In the West Nile\nregion, Ugandan women are 6 percentage points less likely than men to participate in the labour market\n(72 percent male versus 66 percent female), compared to 8 percentage points for refugees (37 percent\nmale versus 29 percent female). In the Southwest region, the gaps are 7 percentage points for hosts (74\npercent male versus 67 percent female and 13 percentage points for refugees (70 percent male versus\n57 percent female), respectively. Surprisingly, Kampala reports the highest gender gap in labour force\nparticipation: the gender gap is 26 percentage points for host (79 percent male versus 53 percent female)\nand 30 percentage points for refugees (70 percent male versus 57 percent female). This gender gap in\nKampala for both communities is close to the average gender gap globally which is 31 percentage points\nand is commonly cited as a sizeable macroeconomic loss (Dabla-Norris and Kochhar 2019; Blecker and\nSeguino 2012).\n\nA third labour market outcome considered is the unemployment rate. Not only are refugees less likely\nthan host communities to participate in the labour market, those who do so are less likely to find\nemployment. The refugee unemployment rate is 31 percent, which is 24 percentage points higher than 7\npercent for the host community. After considering age, gender and educational differences, the difference\nin unemployment rates between refugees and host communities is still sizeable at 19 percentage points.\n\n\n_Higher education levels are associated with higher employment rates and paid employment_\n\nAs with nationals, refugees with higher levels of education have more success in the labour market. The\nsurvey data indicates that chances of getting hired in the non-agricultural sector increases with higher\neducation levels, especially for people who have completed secondary education or have higher\neducation for both refugee and host communities (Figure 1).\n\n\n_Figure 1: Educational attainment, employment sector and getting paid_\n\n\nUNHCR 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "gender gap in labour force\nparticipation",
-          "confidence": 0.702421247959137,
-          "start": 199,
-          "end": 205
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Dabla-Norris and Kochhar",
-          "confidence": 0.8980145454406738,
-          "start": 271,
-          "end": 274
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Kampala",
-          "confidence": 0.5503101944923401,
-          "start": 195,
-          "end": 196
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2019",
-          "confidence": 0.770045816898346,
-          "start": 274,
-          "end": 275
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey data",
-          "confidence": 0.9943695664405823,
-          "start": 400,
-          "end": 402
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.859112560749054,
-          "start": 357,
-          "end": 358
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "have completed secondary education or higher education. Regression results controlling for common\ndemographic characteristics confirm this finding.\n\nDespite the returns to secondary school education, completion rates remain low for refugees. Among\nyouth of secondary school age (between 19 and 23 years old), only 11 percent of refugees completed\nsecondary school versus 24 percent for host communities. The main reason for dropping out of school is\nthe expense of tuition (63 percent for host communities versus 43 percent for refugees).\n\n\n_Refugees have lower labour market outcomes even a decade after arrival_\n\nThis section profiles refugee assimilation in terms of employment and unemployment outcomes by\ncomparing refugees with nationals using individual characteristics (education, age, gender and time of\narrival in Uganda).\n\nAs expected, the gap is particularly large for recently arrived refugees. The employment rate of those with\nless than one year of residence in the host country is 62 percentage points lower than the rate of nationals.\nIf they are actively searching for a job, they are 64 percentage points less likely to get hired than a national\n(Figure 2).\n\n\n_Figure 2: Refugee assimilation over time_\n\n\nemployment rates converge but persist. After 10 years, differences in unemployment are not statistically\nsignificant. [i] For employment, refugees in Uganda converge towards nationals but never reach parity in\nthe labour market. This is similar to what was found in Canada for refugees (Bevelander and Pendakur\n2014).\n\nWhile refugees face understandable challenges in participating in the labour market upon arrival, it is\nstriking that the gap persists over time, suggesting that refugees struggle to eliminate their initial labour\nmarket disadvantage vis-\u00e0-vis Ugandans. Potential explanations of these \u201crefugee gaps\u201d is\ndiscrimination, as well as the limited recognition of foreign qualifications and refugees\u2019 limited proficiency\nin the host country\u2019s official languages (Chang 2018). Additional explanations include long periods of\nlabour market inactivity resulting from conflict and displacement due to a lack of social networks and\ndisproportionate lack of information on labour markets (Schuettler and Caron 2020). Even if refugees are\nallowed to work in Uganda, opaque regulations and the extra burden to comply with them can create a\nchilling effect on employing refugees. Research has shown that Ugandan firms are disinclined to hire\nrefugees and seem to lack information about their legal status and specifically their right to work. A recent\n\n\nUNHCR 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Regression results",
-          "confidence": 0.8902437090873718,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 10
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.8786022663116455,
-          "start": 132,
-          "end": 133
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9252077341079712,
-          "start": 32,
-          "end": 33
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Figure 2",
-          "confidence": 0.5822026133537292,
-          "start": 198,
-          "end": 200
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Bevelander and Pendakur",
-          "confidence": 0.5692647695541382,
-          "start": 260,
-          "end": 263
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.5775740742683411,
-          "start": 235,
-          "end": 236
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2014",
-          "confidence": 0.527801513671875,
-          "start": 263,
-          "end": 264
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9148411154747009,
-          "start": 233,
-          "end": 234
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "allowed to move freely and 23 percent of employers are aware refugees have the right to work,\nrespectively (Loiacono and Vargas 2019).\n\n\n_While self-employment is high among both populations, working refugees are more likely than nationals_\n_to fall below the poverty line_\n\nSelf-employment, which is informal in developing economies including in Uganda, and tends to involve\nlower-skill activities, is high for both nationals and refugees in Uganda when compared to neighbouring\ncountries. In Uganda, the self-employment rate is 76 percent of working nationals, 72 percent of working\nrefugees, and 80 percent among youth in refugee communities. In Kenya, self-employment makes up 61\npercent of the total employed population, while in Rwanda the share is 68 percent.\n\nWhile self-employment is overall higher for Ugandan nationals than refugees, there are differences by\nregion. In Kampala, 43 percent of hosts are self-employed versus 24 percent of refugees. In the West\nNile, the rate is 60 percent for hosts and 61 percent refugees; while in Southwest it is 57 percent for both\nhosts and refugees.\n\nThe high level of informality in the Ugandan economy, and the associated employment vulnerability,\nprovides arguably an additional burden for refugees who have relatively less social networks or safety\nnets and assets which can be used in lean times. [ii] The data shows that among the working population,\nrefugees are 1.75 times more likely than host community members to fall below the poverty line, with 28\npercent of working refugees being considered impoverished versus 16 percent of the host community.\n\n\n_A disproportionate number of working refugees earn less than nationals with similar skills-set_\n\nRefugees earn less than Ugandan nationals, and pay gaps are persistent despite education levels (Figure\n3). The majority of working people in both refugee and host communities have primary education (47\npercent for refugees versus 45 percent for hosts). On average, refugees earn 32 percent less than host\ncommunities with similar skills levels. Refugees with primary education earn 33 percent less than host\ncommunity members with the same level of education. This increases to 50 percent less for workers with\nsecondary degrees, and 7 percent less for those with tertiary education. That the pay gap for refugees\nwith secondary degrees is larger is a worrying trend that may signal to refugees that pursuing secondary\neducation does not lead to better pay and may be a factor discouraging pursuit of secondary school.\n\n\n_Figure 3: Pay gaps between refugees and hosts (Monthly salary in Ugandan Shilling)_\n\n\nUNHCR 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data",
-          "confidence": 0.8230164051055908,
-          "start": 240,
-          "end": 241
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.5472438335418701,
-          "start": 216,
-          "end": 217
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Monthly salary in Ugandan Shilling",
-          "confidence": 0.8190551996231079,
-          "start": 451,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6984363198280334,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 459
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_workers experiencing the largest professional downgrade_\n\nEvidence that refugees are taking jobs that they are overqualified for in order to escape unemployment\nhighlights the inherent inequity in the labour market between refuges and hosts.\n\nThe phenomena of refugees accepting employment below their skill and education levels is known as\nprofessional \u201cdowngrading\u201d. To track this skills mismatch, we first compare the refugee job quality to that\npre-displacement. We also study overeducation, which is a situation where a worker has a higher level\nof education than the level required for the job. All these mismatches constitute a form of labour\nunderutilization.\n\nA simple regression analysis finds that the labour status of refugees in their countries of origin is not\nrelated to their subsequent employment status in the labour markets in Uganda. [iii] In general, refugees\nexperience a drastic professional downgrading upon entry, with intermediate and high-skilled workers\nexperiencing the largest downgrade based on the four ISCO-08 skills level. [iv] Across skill levels measured\nprior to displacement, 66 percent of low-skilled refugees downgraded compared to 85 percent of\nintermediate-skilled and 79 percent of high-skilled refugees (see Table 1). This might be due to a lack of\nrecognition of refugee qualifications and poor transferability of refugee skills and professional experience\nin Uganda as suggested by Fasani et al. (2018). Further, some 65 percent of refugees say they would\nlike to be engaged in the same occupation they were before being displaced, while only 20 percent\nmanage to do so.\n\n\n_Table 1: Refugee labour market trajectories before and after displacement (percent)_ _[1]_\n\n\n\n**Before**\n**displacement**\n\n\n\nNot\nworking\n\n\n\n**After displacement**\n\n\n\nVery low\n\nskilled\n\n\n\nLow\nskilled\n\n\n\nIntermediate\n\nskilled\n\n\n\nHigh\n**Total**\nskilled\n\n\n\nNot working 67.0 6.4 24.6 0.7 1.3 100.00\n\n\nVery low skilled 69.0 19.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 100.00\n\n\nLow skilled 59.0 7.3 33.3 0.1 0.2 100.00\n\n\nIntermediate skilled 83.2 0.00 2.4 8.0 6.4 100.00\n\n\nHigh skilled 46.4 8.4 21.6 2.3 21.3 100.00\n\n\nTotal 62.9 7.2 27.6 0.66 1.7 100.00\n\n\nOne way to study qualifications mismatches is to focus on education mismatches using statistical\nmethods. This approach is based on the distribution of workers\u2019 education levels within each occupation\nor occupational group to determine the modal (or median) education level of all workers in the occupation\nor group (Halaby 1994; McGuinness and Sloane 2011). Thus, a person in employment is considered\novereducated or undereducated if their level of education is greater or lower than the modal level of\neducation of all employed persons in the same occupation or group of occupations.\n\n\n1 The study focused on refugees who were of working age before displacement (aged 14 years or older when leaving\ntheir country origin).\n\n\nUNHCR 8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "refugee job quality",
-          "confidence": 0.5871793031692505,
-          "start": 65,
-          "end": 68
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.8426978588104248,
-          "start": 137,
-          "end": 138
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.9429460167884827,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ISCO-08",
-          "confidence": 0.512070894241333,
-          "start": 167,
-          "end": 168
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.6715614199638367,
-          "start": 137,
-          "end": 138
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8529990911483765,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "distribution of workers\u2019 education levels",
-          "confidence": 0.8064326643943787,
-          "start": 467,
-          "end": 473
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "Halaby",
-          "confidence": 0.8141099214553833,
-          "start": 498,
-          "end": 499
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "1994",
-          "confidence": 0.7170162200927734,
-          "start": 499,
-          "end": 500
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "workers",
-          "confidence": 0.549677848815918,
-          "start": 491,
-          "end": 492
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "study",
-          "confidence": 0.7459225058555603,
-          "start": 548,
-          "end": 549
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8163436651229858,
-          "start": 551,
-          "end": 552
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "21 percent overeducated for their current occupation, whereas 14 percent of working refugees are\nundereducated and 36 percent overeducated. The high percentage of overeducated refugees serves as\na barometer to showcase the difficulties refugees face to find relevant jobs. There is no evidence that\narrival dates affect the likelihood of finding appropriate jobs. Thus, refugees\u2019 labour market outcomes are\nsticky over time, suggesting that the chance of finding a job more in line with the refugee\u2019s skills is limited\neven after several years of residence in Uganda.\n\nBeing underemployed can have negative impacts on mental health and well-being. Hultin et al. (2016)\nand Dunlavy et al (2016) show that overeducated jobholders experience more health problems and\npsychological distress. Clark et al. (2014) find that not only is it hard for many workers to transition out of\novereducated employment, but they are also likely to face wage penalties even after they do so. These\nresults suggest that past overeducated employment engender \u201cscarring effects\u2019 with lingering negative\noutcomes on earnings and labour market mobility. These results highlight the important work of trying to\nmatch refugees\u2019 skills early upon arrival to the labour market.\n\n\n**PROFILE OF THE UNEMPLOYED**\n\nAmong both refugee and host communities, younger people face more barriers to employment than older\nindividuals, though refugee youth face more than three times higher unemployment rates than nationals\n\n   - with 44 percent of refugee youth versus 14 percent of national youth unemployed. During the period\nreferenced in the survey data, youth represent 49 percent and 45 percent of the working-age population\namong refugees and hosts, respectively.\n\nFemales represent more than half of the working population in both communities (56 percent of refugees\nand 54 percent of hosts). Among refugees, the unemployment rate of females was 26 percent compared\nto 36 percent for males. For the host community, the corresponding rates for females and males were 8\npercent and 6 percent, respectively.\n\nAmong youth, female nationals have a higher unemployment rate than males, whereas the opposite is\nobserved for refugees. Unemployment among young Ugandan females is 15 percent compared to 12\npercent for males. Among refugees, the unemployment rate is 40 percent for females and 47 percent for\nmales. Idle unemployed youth can lead to negative societal outcomes including abuse of alcohol and\ndrugs, higher rates of teenage pregnancy, and other extremist behaviour including violence.\n\n\nUNHCR 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PROFILE OF THE UNEMPLOYED",
-          "confidence": 0.5169981718063354,
-          "start": 220,
-          "end": 224
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.5059693455696106,
-          "start": 278,
-          "end": 279
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.8800652027130127,
-          "start": 207,
-          "end": 208
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "the employment rate are inversely related for both refugees and the host community, a phenomenon\nknown as the puzzle of the educated unemployed (Ginsberger and Meango 2017; De Vreyer and\nRoubaud 2013). Refugees have between two to three times the unemployment rate of nationals,\ndepending on the education level (Figure 5). Host community members who have secondary education\nand some tertiary education (labelled Tertiary) have the highest unemployment rates of 11 percent and\n17 percent, respectively. A similar pattern is observed for refugees, where unemployment is highest for\nthose with secondary education and some tertiary education at 43 percent and 35 percent, respectively.\nLower educated refugees have lower unemployment rate.\n\nThis puzzle of the educated unemployed is prevalent in developing countries, in particular in Africa\n(Ginsberger and Meango 2017; De Vreyer and Roubaud 2013). This situation is explained by the failure\nor absence of policies to create skilled jobs. It is also potentially a consequence of structural adjustment\npolicies that reduced staff in the civil service, one of the largest employers of higher educated individuals\n(De Vreyer and Roubaud 2013). Further, the low chance of getting a job offer and the lower-skilled\nactivities involved in self-employment are also plausible explanations for the higher unemployment of\neducated individuals in Uganda (Ginsberger and Meango 2017). In addition, it is plausible that when\nindividuals are aiming for employment in a neighbouring country, and to increase their chance of getting\nemployed abroad where the returns to education are higher, individuals in developing countries acquire\nmore education. This leads to an increase of supply of educated workers in the domestic labour supply.\nConsequently, this creates involuntary educated unemployment in developing countries (Stark and Fan\n2011).\n\n\n_Figure 5: Unemployment and education, refugees and host communities_\n_(Note: Tertiary indicates some tertiary education attained)_\n\n\nUNHCR 10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**It is essential to address risk factors at school and improve the low transition rate from primary**\n**to secondary school.** Results from the survey show that for both refuges and Ugandans, higher\neducation levels are associated with better employment outcomes. Yet secondary school completion\nrates remain low for refugees, while that for nationals is declining. The transition to secondary school is\nlimited by a number of main factors, including poor performance on the primary school leaving\nexamination and dropping out of school due to low morale and motivation when teachers hold back\nstudents from taking the exam so that they will not fail. One solution is to assist students by providing\nadditional preparatory courses and materials for exam preparation. The burden of school fees and the\nopportunity cost of attending school, being that youth cannot work to supplement household income, are\nadditional constraints, especially for refugees. Granting both tuition and conditional cash transfers to\nfamilies of students preparing to pass the exam (and subsequently after passing) would help support\nrefugees at risk of not transitioning to secondary school.\n\n\nOverall, prevention measures taken to address risk factors associated with failure at school and early\nschool dropout can have positive impacts on employment outcomes, considering the fact that dropping\nout of school increases the likelihood of unemployment and inactivity later in life (McLaren 2003). Thus,\nthere is a need to continue to strengthen the quality of the education sector for both nationals and\nrefugees.\n\n**Critical to improving secondary school completion rates is to increase the number of schools**\n**available. Investing in math and science curriculum will also improve future employment**\n**prospects.** There are not enough secondary schools in Uganda, especially in areas that host refugees.\nEnsuring equal access to quality education is crucial for addressing socioeconomic problems of poverty,\nunemployment and inequality. The World Bank Uganda Secondary School Expansion Program (USEP)\nis building 34 secondary schools in five years which will bring the overall total to 68 secondary schools\nfor refugees by 2025. The WB USEP will help close the gap on existing infrastructure, though more needs\nto be done, in both improving infrastructure and offering competitive math and science programmes. Due\nto limited infrastructure, the existing secondary programmes for refugees have had very limited math and\nscience curriculum which limits their career options and lifetime earnings potential in math and sciences.\nThere is a need to build infrastructure that will enable math and science classes and attract these teachers\nto less desired locations, such as refugee settlements, by increasing incentives nationally. There is\nlikewise a need to advocate for building more boarding facilities, especially for girls, to resolve issues\nrelated to distance of school from home and associated threats of violence when walking to and from\nschool.\n\n**More specific actions targeted at girls are needed as COVID-19 school closures put girls at**\n**additional risk of dropping out** . According to UNESCO, more than 89 percent of all enrolled students\nare out of school because of COVID-19 closures. This, combined with the pandemic induced economic\ndownturn, will potentially increase dropout rates especially among vulnerable groups including adolescent\ngirls and poor children (which frequently includes refugees). Consequently, this further embeds gender\ngaps in education and leads to increased risk of sexual exploitation, early pregnancy and early and forced\nmarriages. Sustained efforts by UNHCR and partners are needed to increase second chance education\nprogrammes and promote the continued use of radio programs for classes even after schools reopen, to\nand expand online learning to ensure students can maximize educational achievement. Non-financial\nincentives should be explored for teachers to improve motivation and the quality of teaching, including\npotentially room and board and other associated transport, as well as endowments or funds for teachers\nto design curriculum.\n\n**Overall, greater investment in education and training is needed to improve labour market**\n**outcomes.** The data suggests that the level of education required differs across economic sectors and\njob categories, and that few adolescents complete secondary school. This calls for measures to improve\neducation outcomes, which should support future labour market outcomes. To do so, UNHCR and\npartners should explore the reduction of school tuition, the creation of scholarships and programmes\nsubsidizing secondary school fees, and direct cash transfers to low-income refugee families to offset the\nopportunity cost of the student studying instead of working to provide for the family. Even those refugees\n\n\nUNHCR 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9866039752960205,
-          "start": 32,
-          "end": 33
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.6292061805725098,
-          "start": 32,
-          "end": 33
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refuges",
-          "confidence": 0.8074135780334473,
-          "start": 37,
-          "end": 38
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data",
-          "confidence": 0.8283625245094299,
-          "start": 731,
-          "end": 732
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "adolescents",
-          "confidence": 0.5875170230865479,
-          "start": 750,
-          "end": 751
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "and soft skills followed by vocational training. Additional labour market linkage programmes should be\nexplored to improve refugee employment outcomes for all education and skill levels.\n\n**Enhanced focus is needed to reduce the gender gap in employment.** This brief shows that women\nface more difficulties than men in terms of accessing education and finding a job. Evidence has suggested\nthat reducing barriers to women in the workplace significantly boosts welfare and growth. Policy measures\nshould aim at reducing the education gap for women and promoting female labour force participation\nthrough proactive measures to encourage firms to hire women as well as supporting them to start and\nrun businesses. There is also a need to raise awareness for teenage pregnancy to help lower teenage\npregnancy rates as well as build daycare into secondary schools to support the continued education of\nyoung mothers.\n\n**More attention should be given towards linking youth to the labour market.** This analysis shows\nthat youth in both host and refugee communities have difficulties finding jobs. The negative consequences\nof extended unemployment and inactivity in early career include financial hardship and lower employment\nas well as lower long-term earnings prospects. As many young people leave school early and have no\nqualifications, second chance programmes can help individuals increase their formal education, obtain\nrecognized certification and improve their chances of finding a job. Employment training should be a\ncombination of institution-based and on-the-job training, as evidence suggests this combination yields\nhigher positive labour market outcomes for beneficiaries (Fares and Puerto 2009). Additionally, the\nexpansion and strengthening of national Technical and Vocational Education and Training programmes\nand accreditation to include refugees should be explored.\n\n**Assessing refugees\u2019 skills early, facilitating jobs matching soon after arrival, and providing**\n**upskilling training can help refugees get better jobs and wages right from the start.** We find the\nemployment outcome gap between hosts and refugees is particularly large upon arrival (62 percentage\npoints for employment and 64 points for unemployment). Over time, the unemployment gap becomes\nprogressively narrower with years of residence in Uganda, though it never achieves equity over time.\nStudies show early investment in skills assessment, training, and labour market integration activities can\nhelp to promote quicker convergence in employment. Using a standardized approach to measuring skills\nupon registration of refugees can help limit the time needed to match labour market skills requirements.\nUpon arrival, refugees will need intensive job search assistance and matching programmes to overcome\ninformation asymmetries and lack of social networks. Existing evidence suggests job search assistance\nprogrammes are associated with positive effects on employment prospects (Battisti, Giesing, and\nLaurentsyeva 2019).\n\n**In the more medium-term, a system that recognizes overseas qualifications, especially those from**\n**the region, would facilitate positive employment outcomes for both refugees and hosts.** The\nanalysis suggest that 36 percent of employed refugees are holding a job that requires skills lower than\nwhat they possess. Refugees are also professionally downgrading upon arrival. The development of an\neffective system that recognizes refugees\u2019 past experiences as well as credentials would have a\nsignificant impact in helping them identify opportunities concurrent with their skills.\n\nCross-border or regional accreditation recognition standards would facilitate the movement of human\ncapital for both Ugandans and refugees. Indeed, this could be particularly important for Ugandans given\nthe documented youth bulge and the increasingly difficult employment situation. It could also potentially\nimprove equity of wages and limit poverty for working refugees.\n\n**Encouraging government and development actors to provide targeted support to small firms,**\n**including the self-employed, to grow could increase skilled jobs.** The population in Uganda is very\nentrepreneurial, as demonstrated by the large share of self-employed workers among both refugees and\nhost communities. Enabling policy measures which will improve access to financing for entrepreneurs\ncan help the self-employed expand their businesses, which potentially has outsized positive impacts on\nthe economy. Considering the refugee population in particular, having greater access to financial capital\nmight help compensate for the loss of assets due to displacement, and constitute a form of insurance in\nperiods of low revenue (Schuettler and Caron 2020). Evidence shows that interventions such as repeated\ntransfers or one-time grants or credits can efficiently improve business profitability (Schuettler and Caron\n\n\nUNHCR 12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "job search assistance\nprogrammes",
-          "confidence": 0.6866691708564758,
-          "start": 465,
-          "end": 469
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.6167524456977844,
-          "start": 518,
-          "end": 519
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "entrepreneurship training, intensive coaching and financial inclusion hold much promise for supporting\nsustainable livelihoods among refugees in Uganda (Banerjee et al. 2015; Bedoya et al. 2019).\n\nLastly, with regards to the puzzle of the educated unemployed, we believe that additional macroeconomic\nand policy analysis is needed to address the inverse trend on returns to human capital seen for both\nrefugees and nationals and identify key policy solutions. One explanation may be the failure or absence\nof policies to create skilled jobs, and the high level of informality in the Ugandan economy. More thought\nneeds to be given to the subject in order to inform the Ministry of Labour\u2019s transformation plan. Indeed,\ndevelopment actors have a role to play in showcasing best practices for the Government of Uganda, and\nto assess the best policy options in the national context.\n\n\n**CONCLUSIONS**\n\nAccess to gainful employment is a concern for all people living in Uganda. For refugees, livelihoods\nopportunities are vital to the integration into their new community, safety and protection, self-esteem and\ntheir empowerment.\n\nThis brief highlights the considerable difference in labour market participation between refugees and host\ncommunity members in Uganda. Moreover, refugees who are in the labour market are less likely to find\nemployment than nationals-the refugee unemployment rate stands at 31 percent, 24 percentage points\nhigher than that of the host community. Refugees systematically have jobs below their skill level and are\npaid less than nationals for doing similar skilled jobs. In particular, higher-skilled workers experienced\ndrastic professional downgrading upon entry, and refugees on average are overeducated for most of the\noccupations they are holding, reflecting a mismatch between skills obtained before displacement and\nemployment obtained upon arrival in Uganda.\n\nThis overeducation of refugees is costly to individuals and firms, as well as the Ugandan economy more\ngenerally. Policies addressing these mismatches can have positive overall impacts on refugees\u2019\ncontribution to the Ugandan economy.\n\nUnlike in developed countries, the level of education and the unemployment rate are inversely related for\nboth the refugee and host communities, although refugees have between two to three times higher\nunemployment than nationals, depending on the education level. This situation suggests the necessity to\ndevelop policies aiming to create skilled jobs for both refugees and host communities.\n\n\n**Endnotes**\n\ni In comparison, refugee economic outcomes in the United States have been shown to overtake those of\neconomic immigrants after about 10 years (Cortes 2004).\n\nii Self-employment characterized by the absence of formal work arrangements and adequate social\nsecurity is found to place individuals in a heightened state of vulnerability (ILO 2010).\n\niii The authors regress the current skill job of refugees on their skill job before displacement by using an\nordered logistic regression and perform a LR test. The results suggest no effect of the previous\nemployment status.\n\niv The four ISCO-08 skill levels are based on the characteristics of tasks performed and types of skill\nrequired. For more details see ILO (2012). These categories are referred to as \u201cvery low-skilled\u201d, \u201clowskilled\u201d, intermediate-skilled\u201d, and \u201chigh-skilled jobholders\u201d.\n\n\nUNHCR 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/f45c7c29-ede0-3ce0-839e-468be57dbd00/5fe31b2b4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_136/raw/doc_136_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,290 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# Protecting older people in emergencies: _good practice guide_\n\n\n\n**When communities are struck by conflict or**\n**natural disaster, older people are among the**\n**most vulnerable people affected. Some need**\n**targeted assistance or specific approaches**\n**within general assistance to address their**\n**needs. However, humanitarian programmes**\n**often fail to recognise the challenges and**\n**vulnerabilities faced by older people \u2013 either**\n**because they do not meet their programming**\n**criteria or because their needs are not fully**\n**understood.**\n\n**This situation urgently needs to change.**\n**If the humanitarian sector is to meet its**\n**commitment to deliver impartial humanitarian**\n**assistance that responds to the needs of the**\n**most vulnerable people, it is essential that**\n**it focuses on older people in emergencies.**\n\n**Older people play crucial roles within society,**\n**and are often pivotal in supporting response**\n**and recovery to disasters. Many care for**\n**children and make essential contributions to**\n**family income, while others hold important**\n**roles as community leaders or as holders**\n**of community knowledge and tradition.**\n**In overlooking older people\u2019s roles and their**\n**needs, we also overlook the needs of their**\n**families and dependants, and forgo a**\n**potentially central part of community recovery.**\n\n**This briefing draws on 14 field projects to**\n**highlight common challenges of supporting**\n**older people, and highlights best practice**\n**approaches to protect older people\u2019s rights.**\n\n\n## Background\n\nBetween 2008 and 2011, the United Nations High\nCommission for Refugees (UNHCR) funded HelpAge\nInternational to second two experts on ageing to the\nGlobal Protection Cluster. The role of these experts\nwas to help cluster members working in the field to\nidentify and respond to protection risks facing older\npeople affected by conflict and natural disaster, and to\nincorporate their needs in evidenced-based protection\nprogramming.\n\nThe experts visited 11 countries as part of this project.\nIn 2008 they visited Uganda, Indonesia, and Georgia\n(with a follow up visit to Georgia in 2009). In 2009 they\nvisited Myanmar and Gaza. The following year they\nvisited Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan and Yemen, and finally\nin 2011 they visited South Sudan, Somalia and Kenya.\nTheir work involved providing technical support to\nfield-level protection clusters, to increase cluster staff\nand partners\u2019 awareness, knowledge and skill in\nidentifying and responding to the protection risks faced\nby older people in natural disasters and conflicts.\nIn Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan, the secondee was tasked\nwith facilitating the mainstreaming of both ageing and\ndisability into protection responses.\n\nOf the 14 case studies in this good practice guide,\n11 summarise the key challenges and most effective\nresponses that the experts identified during their visits.\nThe three remaining case studies \u2013 from Darfur,\nthe Occupied Palestinian Territories and Zimbabwe \u2013\ndraw on HelpAge\u2019s own work in the field. All the case\nstudies demonstrate practical approaches that will\nhelp agencies increase the age-friendliness of their\nprogramming and make sure older people play an active\nrole in their responses.\n\nThe overall aim of this good practice guide is to\ncommunicate \u2018what works\u2019, within a range of contexts,\nto promote protection initiatives for older people in\nemergencies that are truly inclusive.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "case studies",
-          "confidence": 0.9566491842269897,
-          "start": 567,
-          "end": 569
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "HelpAge",
-          "confidence": 0.7230061292648315,
-          "start": 610,
-          "end": 611
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.7954385280609131,
-          "start": 534,
-          "end": 536
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "case\nstudies",
-          "confidence": 0.9913001656532288,
-          "start": 621,
-          "end": 623
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "HelpAge",
-          "confidence": 0.9925806522369385,
-          "start": 610,
-          "end": 611
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Occupied Palestinian Territories",
-          "confidence": 0.8375188708305359,
-          "start": 602,
-          "end": 605
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.9085320234298706,
-          "start": 639,
-          "end": 641
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "## Key areas of humanitarian response\n\nThis good practice guide focuses on working practice\nin the following areas of humanitarian response:\n\n**\u2022** **[accessible shelter and latrines]**\n\n**\u2022** **[livelihood support]**\n\n**\u2022** **[access to food and accurate registration]**\n\n**\u2022** **[strengthening family and community structures]**\n\n**\u2022** **[better use of disaggregated data]**\n\n**\u2022** **[appropriate healthcare]**\n\n**\u2022** **[mainstreaming age across clusters. ]**\n\nIn each area, good practice is highlighted through one\nor more case studies that describe approaches to\nintegrating the needs and priorities of older people into\nhumanitarian response. Each one is rounded off with a\nlist of \u2018good practice action points\u2019, which provide key\npointers to refer to during programme development.\n\n### **Accessible shelter and latrines**\n\nIn natural disasters and protracted conflict-induced\nemergencies, one of the most common protection risks\nis of people\u2019s homes being damaged or lost altogether.\nThis forces people to find temporary shelter in crowded\ncamps or collective centres, or with relatives or other\nhosts \u2013 often in unfamiliar places. [1]\n\nFor older people, this experience can be especially\ndevastating. [2] Older people may lack the physical\nstrength and capacity to rebuild and repair their homes,\nrelying on others to support them. Those without family\nor community support may face additional challenges\nassociated with reaching and accessing safe shelter\nand establishing ownership of land. Finally, agencies\nworking to design and build shelters often do not\nregularly consult with older people on their needs\nand how they can participate in shelter solutions. [3]\n\n\n**Case study: Kyrgyzstan**\n\nIn June 2010, ethnic violence erupted in and around\nthe town of Osh, in southern Kyrgyzstan, resulting\nin death, injury and the destruction of approximately\n2,300 homes. The violence led to massive displacement\ninto neighbouring Uzbekistan and 300,000 people\nbeing internally displaced. A multi-sector response\nwas launched by UN agencies and non-governmental\norganisations (NGOs) to address the needs of the\naffected population.\n\n\n**2**\n\n\n\nTwo assessments of older people\u2019s experience of the\nresponse were carried out in the form of a Protection\nCluster Rapid Assessment and an Age and Disability\nHousehold Assessment. In both assessments, older\npeople identified shelter as a priority need, with\nparticular concerns about how they would be able to\nrepair and rebuild damaged and destroyed homes. [4]\n\nA review of the Shelter Cluster plan indicated that\nhouses being rebuilt by Shelter Cluster agencies and\ngovernment were not always accessible to people with\nmobility problems, which include a number of older\npeople. The HelpAge expert on ageing who was\nseconded to the Global Protection Cluster (see page 1)\nencouraged the shelter and protection teams to work\ntogether to make sure that findings from consultations\nwith older people were integrated into Shelter Cluster\nactivities.\n\nThis led the Shelter Cluster to redesign its houses\nintended for older people with mobility problems.\nThe new design adhered to international standards of\naccessibility [5] and incorporated wide doorways to enable\nwheelchair access, low windows for greater visibility\nby people using wheelchairs and at the entrance, ramps\nand handrails.\n\nAlso, as a result of collaboration with the Age and\nDisability Working Group members, the Water,\nSanitation and Hygiene (WASH) Cluster adjusted\nthe latrine design to meet international standards of\naccessibility, both in older people\u2019s homes and in public\nplaces. The revised design included wider doorways\nto allow room for wheelchairs and to enable carers to\nsupport people during use. The work with other clusters\nwas undertaken in support of the Protection Cluster\u2019s\nprotection mainstreaming role and responsibility.\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Consult older people on their priority needs.**\n\n**\u2022 Involve older people in designing and building**\n**shelters.**\n\n**\u2022 Incorporate age-friendly features into temporary**\n**shelters and latrines and into those being repaired**\n**or constructed, including ramps, handrails, grab**\n**bars and lighting.**\n\n**\u2022 Coordinate responses with other clusters, such**\n**as Shelter, WASH, and others focusing on core**\n**concerns, such as gender and disability.**\n\n**\u2022 Adhere to international standards of accessibility**\n**when building shelters and latrines.**\n\n\nSee also _Guidance on including older people in emergency_\n_shelter programmes._ [6]\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "disaggregated data",
-          "confidence": 0.8835675716400146,
-          "start": 95,
-          "end": 97
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.8858590722084045,
-          "start": 153,
-          "end": 155
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Protection\nCluster Rapid Assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.996060311794281,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.5289756059646606,
-          "start": 455,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Kyrgyzstan",
-          "confidence": 0.8815076351165771,
-          "start": 350,
-          "end": 351
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.9560366868972778,
-          "start": 328,
-          "end": 330
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Age and Disability\nHousehold Assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.9889097809791565,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 463
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Kyrgyzstan",
-          "confidence": 0.6740943193435669,
-          "start": 350,
-          "end": 351
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.9470804929733276,
-          "start": 328,
-          "end": 330
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Livelihood support**\n\nIn emergencies, it is not uncommon for older people to\nlose access to their land and other property, becoming\ncut off from normal livelihoods and sources of income.\nMeanwhile, agencies often plan livelihood activities\nwithout considering older people\u2019s capacity [7] or their\nrole in supporting family income. This means they\nare often excluded from income-generating activities,\nfood-for-work or cash-for-work programmes, and micro\ncredit. As a result, older people who are displaced\nduring emergencies face particularly high levels of\nsocial and economic hardship \u2013 especially if they\nare separated from their families and other support\nstructures. [8]\n\n\n**Case study: northern Uganda**\n\nFor more than two decades, Uganda was home to\nviolent unrest due to the rebellion of the armed\nreligious group the Lord\u2019s Resistance Army and\ngovernment counterinsurgency actions. During the\nconflict, more than 1.8 million northern Ugandans\nwere forced to move to internally displaced persons\n(IDP) camps. Long-term displacement led to social\ndisintegration and a heavy dependency on food rations\nand NGO or UN support. Livelihoods were further\nlimited by the lack of access to traditional agricultural\nland and limited opportunity to become economic\nself-sufficient.\n\nFrom 2007 onwards food assistance was phased out\nand the camps closed. To achieve sustainable solutions\nand successfully close the camps, agencies needed to\nhelp households to become economically independent.\nHowever, in 2008 the majority of displaced people\nreturning to their place of origin were young and able\nbodied. Many older people remained in camps and\ntransit sites, where they cared for, and were cared for,\nby household members who were less economically\nproductive \u2013 especially grandchildren and other\nvulnerable children. [9] Older people who were consulted\nduring NGO monitoring visits around this time cited\nthe lack of livelihoods opportunities as a major concern.\n\n\n**Eye examinations**\n**at Camp Acra, Haiti**\n\n\n\nOne protection NGO began consulting with older\npeople in transit locations who were caring for\norphaned and vulnerable children. It identified older\npeople who wanted to develop their livelihoods beyond\nfood aid, by running small market stalls and selling\nkitchen garden produce. The NGO worked with\ncommunity leaders to arrange for a handful of stalls\nto be used, and subsidised initial rental fees until\nthe stalls were self-sufficient. This intervention also\nhelped legitimise the position of the stall workers, and\nprotected them from harassment by other stall holders.\n\nThe produce was sold by, or on behalf of, older\nhousehold heads (most of whom were older women).\nThe profits were then reinvested in kitchen gardens,\nwhich were used to support grandchildren with\nschool fees, clothing and medication. This simple\nlivelihood initiative succeeded in mitigating the\neconomic risk, both to the older people and to the\nchildren in their care.\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Consult older people on their priority needs.**\n\n**\u2022 Recognise older people\u2019s capacity and desire**\n**to be involved in livelihood activities.**\n\n**\u2022 Involve older people in developing and**\n**implementing livelihood solutions.**\n\n**\u2022 Implement solutions with the support and**\n**cooperation of community leaders.**\n\n**\u2022 Coordinate response with other clusters, such**\n**as Early Recovery.**\n\n\nSee also the publication by HelpAge International\nand Cordaid _Making a living last longer._ [10]\n\n\n**3**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Access to food and accurate** **registration**\n\nWhen people are displaced, access to adequate food,\nsafe water and basic services deteriorates, leading to\nhunger, malnutrition and disease. [11] For people with\nphysical mobility challenges, reaching distribution\npoints or markets to collect or buy food can be an\nenormous challenge. Where food is available, older\npeople with dental or digestive problems may have\ntrouble chewing or digesting certain foods.\n\n\n**Case study: northern Uganda**\n\nIn Gulu district, northern Uganda, protection\nmonitoring by UNHCR highlighted a number of\nchallenges facing older people in accessing food\ndistribution. The older people reported that food\ndistributions often last all day, and involve waiting in\nthe hot sun during the dry season with limited shade,\nor in cold, wet conditions during the rains. People\nhave no access to latrines or water during this lengthy\nprocess, which further contributes to anxiety and\nill health. Some \u2013 particularly older women \u2013 also\nexpressed concerns about the difficulty of carrying\nheavy food items to their huts.\n\nThe protection and food distribution agencies\ndiscussed these findings and found a way to modify\nthe distribution procedures. They began running a\nseparate distribution line for older people and those\nwith disabilities. They also set up a proxy collection\nsystem, where younger able-bodied relatives or\nneighbours could collect the food on the person\u2019s\nbehalf. Information on the proxy person was noted\neither on the registration card or with the distributing\nagency to make sure the proxy person could access\nthe distribution and to avoid fraudulent collection\nof assistance.\n\n\n**Zenul, 70,**\n**is a member**\n**of her local**\n**Older People\u2019s**\n**Association**\n**in Allipul,**\n**Pakistan**\n\n\n**4**\n\n\n\n**Separate queues and proxy collection \u2013**\n**key considerations**\n\n**Separate queuing systems and proxy systems of**\n**the type described in the north Ugandan case**\n**study can be expanded to include distributions**\n**of non-food items, information and health care**\n**delivery (see Darfur case study below). For this**\n**to be effective, the only requirements are that**\n**registration lists must be accurate and up to date,**\n**and that there are enough staff present to carry**\n**out two parallel distribution processes. As part**\n**of HelpAge\u2019s cash transfer activities globally,**\n**the proxy system has also been found to enable**\n**housebound older people to participate in the**\n**cash transfer programme.**\n\n**In the north Ugandan case, because older**\n**displaced Ugandans had been accessing food aid**\n**for nearly two decades, the question of accurate**\n**inclusion on registration lists was not an issue.**\n**UNHCR and WFP had carried out extensive**\n**registration of displaced people, which was**\n**inclusive and up to date. However, in other**\n**locations visited by HelpAge secondees (see**\n**page 1), such as South Sudan, incomplete and**\n**inaccurate registration processes often left older**\n**household heads \u2013 especially housebound**\n**older people \u2013 excluded from food and other**\n**humanitarian relief lists.**\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Consult older people on their food needs,**\n**including preferred foods that they find easy**\n**to chew and digest, their ability to access**\n**distribution sites, and their capacity to carry**\n**food distributions home.**\n\n**\u2022 Ensure accurate inclusion of older men and**\n**women in registration lists.**\n\n**\u2022 Communicate age-friendly distribution**\n**processes with the support and cooperation of**\n**community leaders and humanitarian actors \u2013**\n**for example, through separate distribution**\n**queues and proxy collection systems.**\n\n**\u2022 Provide transport or other support to enable**\n**older people to take their distributions home.**\n\n**\u2022 Coordinate the response with other clusters,**\n**such as Food, Health and Nutrition.**\n\n**\u2022 Hold distributions at locations that are**\n**physically accessible \u2013 for example, in central**\n**locations on level ground.**\n\n\nSee also the publication _Humanitarian action and older_\n_persons._ [12]\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "registration lists",
-          "confidence": 0.899164617061615,
-          "start": 441,
-          "end": 443
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "humanitarian relief lists",
-          "confidence": 0.8537725210189819,
-          "start": 667,
-          "end": 670
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "South Sudan",
-          "confidence": 0.8407835960388184,
-          "start": 627,
-          "end": 629
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "older people",
-          "confidence": 0.7271466255187988,
-          "start": 655,
-          "end": 657
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Strengthening family and** **community structures**\n\nNatural disasters, conflict and long-term displacement\nstretch family coping mechanisms to their limits.\nParticular challenges include the reduced capacity for\nincome generation, family members being displaced,\nand psychosocial factors such as grief, trauma or high\nlevels of stress.\n\nAfter an emergency, families are often unable, or\nunwilling, to support older members of their\nhousehold. With the breakdown of traditional\ncommunity social structures, older people can become\nmarginalised and excluded from formal decision\nmaking. This makes it more likely that the risks they\nface will be overlooked. [13] The disintegration of families\nduring crises and long-term displacement can also\nlead to poor communication between generations \u2013\nespecially between older people and young people. [14]\n\n\n**Case study: Kenya**\n\nIn 2011, the Horn of Africa experienced its worst\ndrought in 20 years, with an estimated 12 million\npeople in Kenya, Ethiopia, Somalia and Djibouti\naffected by food shortages and lacking the means to\nmeet their basic survival needs. Acute malnutrition\nbecame widespread. In Somalia, drought and conflict\nled to about 1.7 million people being displaced \u2013\nabout 10 per cent of whom crossed into neighbouring\ncountries.\n\nIn Dadaab camp, Kenya, one child-focused NGO\nhad been operating a foster-care project for\nunaccompanied children. It expanded its programming\nto include grandparent carers and young people in\nintergenerational activities, designed to reassert older\npeople\u2019s roles as leaders and educators, and to reduce\nthe gap between old and young. Older people provided\nsupport and mentoring to the young people, while\nthe young people supported their foster grandparents\nin practical ways, such as helping with maintaining\nand repairing shelters. At the time of publishing,\ndiscussions were ongoing about ways to scale up this\nprogramme to include livelihoods and unconditional\ncash transfers.\n\nA second project in the same camp ran older people\u2019s\nsupport groups. In these groups, older community\nmembers came together to identify and develop\nsolutions to key social, economic and other challenges\nthat they faced. They then held discussions with\ncommunity representatives, in order to raise the issues\nwith key decision makers for action.\n\nInitial feedback indicated that the older people who\ntook part in both these projects felt more confident,\nless isolated and more included in decision-making\nprocesses.\n\n\n\n**Case study: Zimbabwe**\n\nOlder people\u2019s committees are a well-established\nway of ensuring that old people\u2019s voices are heard.\nThese are support groups, designed to empower older\npeople to engage in mutual social or economic support\nand direct political advocacy. HelpAge adopted this\napproach in Zimbabwe, to help older people become\nmore involved in programme delivery.\n\nThrough the committees, HelpAge provided training\nand technical advice to older people on issues such as\nsocial support, advocacy and livelihoods (for example,\nthrough sustainable agriculture). The older people\nbecame more involved in processes such as beneficiary\nidentification, registration and selection, and played a\nmore active role in the communication and information\nprocesses between humanitarian actors and\nbeneficiary populations.\n\nA project evaluation found that older participants had\nbecome active \u2013 both as community mobilisers, and\nas educators about issues such as conservation\nfarming, home-based care and hygiene, and HIV/AIDS.\nThey had also begun playing a vital role in dialogue\nbetween communities and government and NGO\ndecision makers.\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Consult older people about what their priority**\n**needs are.**\n\n**\u2022 Recognise the role of older people both as carers**\n**and as people in need of care.**\n\n**\u2022 Give older persons a voice in community**\n**decision-making processes and encourage them**\n**to actively participate in finding the solutions.**\n\n**\u2022 Involve older people in developing inter-**\n**generational activities.**\n\n**\u2022 Establish older people\u2019s committees and support**\n**groups.**\n\n**\u2022 Seek holistic and intergenerational solutions**\n**to psychosocial responses.**\n\n**\u2022 Make sure community meetings include a wide**\n**representation of older people, with men and**\n**women alike given the opportunity to formally**\n**voice their concerns and ideas.**\n\n\n**5**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Better use of disaggregated data**\n\nIn order to understand and respond appropriately to\npeople\u2019s vulnerabilities, needs, capacities and ensure\naccess to life-saving services, humanitarian agencies\nneed to collect information based on sex and age. [15]\nWithout this data, they are unable to effectively\nunderstand and respond to the priorities of older men\nand women. However, the humanitarian system still\ndoes not age-disaggregate its data collection and\nanalysis across all stages of emergency response.\n\n\n**Case study: Myanmar**\n\nOn 2 May 2008, Myanmar was struck by Cyclone\nNargis. High winds, heavy rainfall and tidal surges\nkilled nearly 85,000 people, with roughly 54,000 people\nleft missing and a further 20,000 injured. The cyclone\naffected 2.4 million people \u2013 just under one third of\nthe estimated 7.35 million people living in the affected\ntownships. Of these, approximately 200,000 were\n55 years or older at the time of the disaster. [16]\n\nAs part of multi-agency and sector monitoring, from\nSeptember 2008 to August 2009 the Tripartite core\ngroup involving the Association of Southeast Asian\nNations (ASEAN), the United Nations (UN) and the\ngovernment of Myanmar carried out three reviews\nof sector responses to generate data to inform targeted\nassistance, determine future assessments and\naccelerate appropriate response and recovery\nactivities. [17]\n\nWithin the protection element of the review, the\nHelpAge ageing expert seconded to the Global\nProtection Cluster (see page 1) observed gaps in\ninformation gathering about older people. Working with\nprotection agencies, the expert helped to revise the\nmonitoring questions used in the review. This resulted\nin a more holistic analysis and inclusion of information\non older men and women. The new format included\nstandardising the definition of an older person as\nsomeone aged 60+, and disaggregating protection\ndata for older people by gender. It also ensured that\nquestions were included on numbers of older people\nwho lacked documentation (which is essential for\naccessing health care).\n\nIncluding age-inclusive questions in this way enabled\nthe protection agencies to measure the impact of\nCyclone Nargis on older household heads\u2019 ability to\nearn a livelihood. Ultimately, the periodic review was\nmodified into a more holistic tool that could be used\nto collect, analyse and report on disaggregated data that\nincluded older people. The results could then be used\nto improve future emergency response and recovery\nprogramming, to make it appropriate to the specific\nneeds of affected communities.\n\n\n**6**\n\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Accurately collect information on older people**\n**during registration processes.**\n\n**\u2022 Introduce and apply data collection systems that:**\n\n**\u2013 disaggregate data by age and sex**\n\n**\u2013 detail registration of affected populations**\n\n**\u2013 establish baselines**\n\n**\u2013 enable needs assessments, monitoring and**\n\n**evaluation.**\n\n### **Appropriate healthcare**\n\nOlder age is often accompanied by decreased mobility,\nsight, hearing and strength. Minor ailments can\nbecome serious impairments that can weaken older\npeople\u2019s coping strategies in response to emergencies. [18]\nOlder people tend to have poor access to medical\nservices during emergencies, and often experience\na lack of understanding, expertise or medication for\nthe treatment of chronic illnesses.\n\n\n**Case study: West Darfur, Sudan**\n\nBy 2011, the Darfur emergency of 2003/4 had become\na protracted humanitarian crisis, with as many as\n2 million people becoming internally displaced \u2013\nmany living in camps throughout Darfur. Of these, an\nestimated 8 per cent of the camp population were made\nup of older people.\n\nHelpAge had worked in West Darfur since 2004.\nIn 2005/6, it carried out a series of assessments and\nsurveys to consult older people about their\nvulnerabilities and health and nutrition needs. [19]\nResults showed that older people in Darfur were not\naccessing health services despite clinics being\navailable. This was for a number of complex reasons.\nMany older people were experiencing isolation and\nneglect, and were excluded from food aid and health\nprogrammes, while others with mobility concerns\nlacked transport. These factors left many older people\nreticent and unable to seek medical care.\n\nIn response to this gap in health services provision,\nHelpAge established a roster of community health\nworkers to visit housebound older people, providing\ncare and referral as required. They also introduced a\ndonkey cart ambulance to transport older people to\nclinics for emergency care. Another initiative involved\ndistributing supplementary food baskets to older people\nat risk of malnutrition, or who were caring for multiple\ndependents.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Meanwhile, HelpAge staff advocated that medical NGOs\nshould set aside specific clinic times each week as\npriority referral times for older people. When the clinic\nwas unable to source or deliver drugs, HelpAge did this\ndirectly, to ensure that older people were accessing the\nmedication they needed.\n\nThese interventions had a range of positive outcomes.\nThe older people became more willing to access health\nservices on their own, and reported higher levels of\nwell-being.\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Consult older people on their priority needs.**\n\n**\u2022 Make sure that health services respond to older**\n**people\u2019s chronic health needs.**\n\n**\u2022 Disaggregate health data by age and gender,**\n**including information on HIV/AIDS, to ensure**\n**clarity on older people\u2019s health needs.**\n\n**\u2022 Provide emergency health providers with training**\n**in how to treat older patients.**\n\n**\u2022 Coordinate responses with other clusters, such**\n**as Food and Nutrition, and with other agencies.**\n\n\nSee also IASC\u2019s _Report on an inter-agency review conducted by_\n_HelpAge International_ . [20]\n\n### **Mainstreaming age across clusters**\n\nOlder people are entitled to equal protection under\ninternational human rights and humanitarian law, but\noften these rights are not realised. Building stakeholder\nawareness of the rights and needs of older people is a\ncrucial step in reducing their marginalisation during\nemergencies, giving them a voice in their own future,\nand enabling them to continue supporting themselves\nand their dependants. [21]\n\n\n**Case study: Pakistan**\n\nDuring the 2010 monsoon, Pakistan experienced the\nworst floods in its history. Flooding hit 84 of 121 districts\nand displaced over 20 million people. More than 1,700\nmen, women and children lost their lives, and nearly 2\nmillion had their homes damaged or destroyed. [22]\nOver a million of the affected people were aged 60+.\n\nA vast number of humanitarian stakeholders were\ninvolved in the Pakistan response, and this created\ndifficulties in integrating age-friendly responses by\nclusters. Identifying key UN, NGO and government\ndecision makers was a challenge, both at national and\nregional levels. Even with specific cluster commitment\nto address core concerns such as age and disability,\nthe lack of field data on older people reduced the\nefficacy (and legitimacy) of advocacy messages, and\nmade claims of exclusion of older people from service\nprovision hard to prove.\n\n\n\nTo highlight the needs of older and disabled people,\nUNHCR brought an Age and Disability Task Force into\nthe Protection Cluster. Drawing on its age and disability\nexpertise and human resources, the task force\ninfluenced humanitarian agencies to mainstream age\nand disability across protection and other clusters.\nThrough consultation and assessment, individual\nmembers identified key issues for older and disabled\npeople who had been affected by the flooding.\nTask force members were then assigned to specific\nclusters to advocate for age-friendly and disabilityfriendly responses to be part of emergency and early\nrecovery initiatives. The task force was also given\na space on the Protection Cluster meeting agendas.\n\nTask force outputs focused on older and disabled people\nbeing included in three key areas:\n\n**\u2022** [needs assessments, implementation and monitoring]\n\n**\u2022** [developing technical guidance]\n\n**\u2022** [promoting inclusive reconstruction through ]\nhumanitarian and government partners.\n\n\n**The task force approach**\n\n**As a replicable mechanism for inclusive response in**\n**emergencies, a task force that combines the core**\n**humanitarian issues of age and disability has many**\n**advantages. For example, older and disabled people**\n**share similar experiences of exclusion, lack of voice,**\n**and limited active participation in emergency**\n**programming. Identifying these shared exclusions,**\n**backed up by field data, can strengthen the advocacy**\n**position of such a task force in pushing humanitarian**\n**stakeholders to adopt a more inclusive emergency**\n**response. The approach has been successfully**\n**implemented in various contexts including the**\n**Occupied Palestinian Territories and Myanmar.**\n\n**This approach also ensures that for both age and**\n**disability mainstreaming, there is an instrument to**\n**encourage coordinated advocacy, partnership, and**\n**raising awareness. Finally, it legitimises age and**\n**disability as central concerns in assistance activities,**\n**and reminds humanitarian actors that inclusion of**\n**age and disability is a humanitarian obligation.**\n\n\n**Good practice action points**\n\n**\u2022 Make sure older people have a specific voice in**\n**the cluster response mechanism.**\n\n**\u2022 Bring together age and disability stakeholders**\n**to increase the capacity for advocacy within the**\n**cluster system, and to identify key areas of**\n**influence.**\n\n**\u2022 Develop holistic ways of meeting the priority**\n**needs of older and disabled people through**\n**cross-cluster advocacy and partnership.**\n\n\n**7**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Ajabo Ahmed, 70,**\n**Dadaab Refugee Camp, Kenya**\n\n## Conclusion\n\nThis good practice guide highlights the need for\nagencies to better understand and address older\npeople\u2019s needs, and to integrate their contributions\ninto interventions. It identifies elements of good\npractice for age-friendly programming during\nemergencies.\n\nThe examples of good practices shown here have two\nkey common elements: consultation with older people\nthemselves and an appreciation that older people can\nplay a vital role in developing and implementing their\nown solutions to the challenges they face.\n\nA crucial element of any successful, age-friendly\nresponse is ensuring that older people have a voice in\ndecisions that directly affect them. Coordinating and\ncooperating with community leaders and members of\nthe larger humanitarian community is also necessary\nto ensure a holistic sustainable response.\n\nAnother important ingredient is that information\nabout affected populations must be fully\ndisaggregated, to accurately highlight the impact of\nthe crisis upon older people and those in their care.\n\nFinally, a greater awareness and integration of ageing\nissues across the work of all clusters will further the\nprotection of older people by make sure that more\nand more diverse partners integrate age-friendly\nprogramming into their preparedness, response and\nrecovery activities.\n\n\n**8**\n\n\n\n**Endnotes**\n\n**1.** Global Protection Cluster Work Group, _Handbook for the protection of internally_\n_displaced persons,_ Geneva, 2007\n\n**2.** International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies/HelpAge\nInternational, _Guidance on including older people in emergency shelter programmes,_\nGeneva/London, 2011\n\n**3.** International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies/HelpAge\nInternational, _Guidance on including older people in emergency shelter programmes_\n\n**4.** Kyrgyzstan Protection Cluster, _Rapid protection assessment,_ Osh, 2010\n\n**5.** Handicap International, _Disability checklist for emergency response_, Lyon, 2010\n\n**6.** International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Societies/HelpAge\nInternational, _Guidance on including older people in emergency shelter programmes_\n\n**7.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Humanitarian action and older persons,_\nGeneva/London, 2008\n\n**8.** Global Protection Cluster Work Group, _Handbook for the protection of internally_\n_displaced persons_\n\n**9.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Strong and fragile: learning from older people_\n_in emergencies,_ Geneva/London, 2007\n\n**10.** HelpAge International/Cordaid, _Making a living last longer_, London, 2011\n\n**11.** Global Protection Cluster Work Group, _Handbook for the protection of internally_\n_displaced persons_\n\n**12.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Humanitarian action and older persons_\n\n**13.** Global Protection Cluster Work Group, _Handbook for the protection of internally_\n_displaced persons_\n\n**14.** HelpAge International, _Rebuilding lives in longer-term emergencies,_ London, 2006\n\n**15.** Mazurana D, Benelli P, Gupta H, and Walker P, _Sex and age matter: improving_\n_humanitarian response in emergencies,_ Medford, Feinstein International Center, 2011\n\n**16.** HelpAge International, _The situation of older people in cyclone-affected Myanmar,_\nLondon, 2009\n\n**17.** Tripartite Core Group, _Post\u2013Nargis periodic review 1,_ Yangon, 2008\n\n**18.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Humanitarian action and older persons_\n\n**19.** HelpAge International, _Rebuilding lives in longer-term emergencies_\n\n**20.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Report on an inter-agency review conducted_\n_by HelpAge International,_ Geneva, 2007\n\n**21.** Inter-Agency Standing Committee, _Humanitarian action and older persons_\n\n**22.** UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, _Pakistan flash appeal,_\nGeneva, 2010\n\n\n**HelpAge International helps older people claim**\n**their rights, challenge discrimination and**\n**overcome poverty, so that they can lead dignified,**\n**secure, active and healthy lives.**\n\n\nHelpAge International\nPO Box 70156\nLondon WC1A 9GB, UK\n\nTel +44 (0)20 7278 7778\nFax +44 (0)20 7387 6992\n\ninfo@helpage.org\n**[www.helpage.org](http://www.helpage.org)**\n\n\nCopyright \u00a9 2012 HelpAge International\nRegistered charity no. 288180\n\n\nDesign by **TRUE** www.truedesign.co.uk\nPrint by **Park Lane Press**\nPrinted on Corona Offset, 100% recycled, NAPM and Blue Angel accredited\n\n\nAny parts of this publication may be reproduced without permission for\nnon-profit and educational purposes unless indicated otherwise. Please clearly\ncredit HelpAge International and send us a copy of the reprinted sections.\n\n\n**ISBN 1 872590 63 2**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a7217620-a83f-3548-835e-45a82ee07e37/6-5-protecting-older-people-in-emergencies-helpage-2013.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_137/raw/doc_137_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,437 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "# UGANDA POLICY BRIEF\n\n**TARGETING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMMES TO PERSONS WITH SPECIFIC NEEDS**\n\nUSING SOCIOECONOMIC EVIDENCE TO DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR REFUGEES IN\nUGANDAN SETTLEMENTS\n\n**SUMMARY**\n\n**\u2022** Refugees with specific needs and vulnerabilities require specialized support and interventions to\nboost their resilience. Referred to as Persons with specific needs, these refugees include\nsurvivors of violence, older and disabled persons, unaccompanied minors, or lactating mothers,\nto name a few categories.\n\n**\u2022** Using vulnerability assessment and household data of refugees in Uganda, researchers examined\nwhether refugee households with persons of specific needs are more economically vulnerable,\nand consequently, need greater financial and employment-related assistance.\n\n**\u2022** The researchers found that refugee households with persons of specific needs spent on average\n23 percent less on food and 18 percent less on non-food items. Overall, their household spending\nis 22 percent less than households without persons of specific needs.\n\n**\u2022** Further, when disaggregated by the main categories of specific needs, single-parent households\nas well as households with members who have health-related problems are the two groups that\nface the highest economic vulnerability.\n\n**\u2022** Households with persons with specific needs are also more likely to have a higher dependency\nratio than other households, providing one possible explanation of their pronounced vulnerability.\n\n\n\n**Background**\n\nRefugees with specific needs, including\nsurvivors of violence, older persons or persons\nwith disability, unaccompanied minors, or\nlactating mothers, face risks that if not identified\nand addressed, can have serious, even lifethreatening consequences for their physical and\npsychological wellbeing.\n\n\nUNHCR advocates for a greater awareness of\nthese needs with the aim of ensuring that\nrefugees of all backgrounds can access\nprogrammes and assistance to boost their\nresilience. In order to provide assistance and\nprotection that address these needs, UNHCR\ncategorizes these individuals into groups and\nprovides support accordingly. [1]\n\n\nAmong non-refugee populations, research\nsuggests households with these individuals tend\n\n\n\nto be more economically vulnerable. Less\nestablished is whether refugee households with\nthese individuals are also economically more\nvulnerable; and if so, what are the implications\nfor policy as well as assistance programmes.\n\n\nUsing data from a recent Uganda Vulnerability\nand Essential Needs Assessment household\nsurvey, the authors of this brief examined the\neconomic vulnerability of refugee households\nwith persons with specific needs.\n\n\nWith over 1.4 million refugees, Uganda is the\nthird largest refugee-hosting nation globally.\nMost refugees in Uganda hail from South Sudan\n(62 percent), the Democratic Republic of Congo\n(DRC) (29 percent), Burundi (3 percent) and\nSomalia (3 percent). The government of Uganda\nhas a generous policy toward refugees that\n\n\n\n[1 See https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/125333/identifying-persons-with-specific-needs and](https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/125333/identifying-persons-with-specific-needs)\n[https://www.unhcr.org/lb/persons-with-specific-needs](https://www.unhcr.org/lb/persons-with-specific-needs)\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "vulnerability assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.9675893783569336,
-          "start": 92,
-          "end": 94
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "UGANDA",
-          "confidence": 0.8466883301734924,
-          "start": 1,
-          "end": 2
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee households",
-          "confidence": 0.8416669964790344,
-          "start": 105,
-          "end": 107
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "household data of refugees in Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.5323854684829712,
-          "start": 95,
-          "end": 101
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "UGANDA",
-          "confidence": 0.8969346284866333,
-          "start": 1,
-          "end": 2
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee households",
-          "confidence": 0.7979027628898621,
-          "start": 105,
-          "end": 107
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Uganda Vulnerability\nand Essential Needs Assessment",
-          "confidence": 0.8615646362304688,
-          "start": 410,
-          "end": 416
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "household\nsurvey",
-          "confidence": 0.9551915526390076,
-          "start": 416,
-          "end": 418
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "authors of this brief",
-          "confidence": 0.5267735719680786,
-          "start": 420,
-          "end": 424
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.9893476963043213,
-          "start": 410,
-          "end": 411
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee households",
-          "confidence": 0.6042290925979614,
-          "start": 378,
-          "end": 380
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "among other benefits, provide land for farming\nand housing.\n\n\n**Methodology**\nThis policy brief uses cross-sectional household\ndata from the Vulnerability and Essential Needs\nAssessment survey. The survey sampled 5,017\nrefugee households distributed geographically\nacross the primary hosting regions in Uganda\nand identified groups of persons with specific\nneeds who may face heightened risks. The\nsurvey is representative of the refugee\npopulation in Uganda at the national as well as\n\n\n\nsettlement levels. Economic well-being and\nvulnerability can be measured in many different\nways. In this note, economic vulnerability is\nmeasured by food, non-food, or overall\nexpenditure per capita.\n\n\nAmong the refugee populations in Uganda, the\nmost common specific needs categories [2] are\nolder persons at risk (12 percent), disability (10.5\npercent), unaccompanied or separated child\n(10.3 percent), those with serious medical\nconditions (8.6 percent), and single parents (6.5\npercent) (Figure 1).\n\n\n\n_**Figure 1: Incidence of specific needs. Categories**_\n_**(Percent of Total Households with Persons with Specific Needs)**_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**Main Findings**\n\n**Households with at least one member who is**\n**a person with specific needs spent less on**\n**food, non-food and overall expenditure than**\n**households** **without** **these** **individuals**\n**(Figure 2).** Consumption and expenditure are\nthe most widely used methods of measuring\npoverty and vulnerability and are used by the\n\n\n\nUganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) in its\nnational statistics. In the following sections,\nhouseholds with at least one member having\nspecific needs are labelled \u201cPSN households\u201d,\nwhile households without are named \u201cNon-PSN\nhouseholds\u201d. All indicators are expressed in\nmonthly expenditure per capita, meaning the\naverage monthly expenditure per household\nmember. [3]\n\n\n\n2 Persons with specific needs vary by refugee population in Uganda. The full list includes: unaccompanied and separated\nchildren, children at risk, children in foster care, child heads of household, single women at risk, women at risk, women\nwith difficult pregnancy, lactating mothers, older people, chronic illness, critical medical conditions, physical or medical\ndisability, impairment (speech, visual, or hearing), torture, single parent, or family unity.\n3 It was not possible to do adult age equivalent due to data limitations.\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Vulnerability and Essential Needs\nAssessment survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9943978786468506,
-          "start": 25,
-          "end": 31
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "cross-sectional household\ndata",
-          "confidence": 0.9262779355049133,
-          "start": 20,
-          "end": 23
-        },
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.8992839455604553,
-          "start": 30,
-          "end": 31
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.9108914732933044,
-          "start": 48,
-          "end": 49
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee households",
-          "confidence": 0.9704951643943787,
-          "start": 38,
-          "end": 40
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "primary"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "national statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.9841264486312866,
-          "start": 314,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "average monthly expenditure per household\nmember",
-          "confidence": 0.6178426742553711,
-          "start": 360,
-          "end": 366
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.9622194766998291,
-          "start": 305,
-          "end": 306
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "households",
-          "confidence": 0.8783069849014282,
-          "start": 322,
-          "end": 323
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_**Figure 2: Expenditure per capita, household with and without PSNs**_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_**Food expenditure.**_ Households without PSNs\nspent on average 30 percent more than those\nwith PSNs on food (p>0.01). The mean monthly\nhousehold food expenditure per capita was\n5,794 Ugandan Shillings or approximately 1.57\nUSD for Non-PSN households, while\nhouseholds with PSNs spent 4,442 Ugandan\nShillings on average, or approximately 1.20\nUSD.\n\n\n_**Non-food**_ _**expenditure.**_ On average,\nhouseholds without PSNs spent 21 percent\nmore than households with PSNs on non-food\nexpenditure (3,576 Ugandan Shillings or 0.97\nUSD vs 2,946 Ugandan Shillings or 0.80 USD).\n\n\n_**Overall expenditure**_ **.** After combining food,\nnon-food expenditure, own consumption as well\nas savings, households without PSNs spent 27\npercent more than non-PSN households (8,706\nUgandan Shillings or 2.36 USD per capita versus\n6,820 Ugandan Shillings or 1.85 USD per capita\n(p>0.01)).\n\n\n**Refugee single parent households face**\n**greater economic vulnerability.** A number of\nauthors have recognized that single-parent\nfamilies are more likely to experience poverty or\nvulnerability (Lu et al. 2020; Huang 2000) across\ncountries in the world. The vulnerability and\nassessment survey data similarly suggest that\n\n\n\nrefugee single-parent households are spending\nless on food, non-food, and overall expenditure\nthan households with two parents. Indeed, they\nspent 37 percent less on food, 41 percent less\non non-food expenditure, and 45 percent less in\noverall expenditure.\n\n\n**Refugee households with members facing**\n**health** **issues** **are** **more** **economically**\n**vulnerable.** Health problems involve direct\nexpenditures that include medical costs like\nhospitalization and outpatient treatment, drugs\nand medical supplies. They also involve indirect\ncosts including the inability to work, the loss of\nproductive labour time and earnings of patients\nas well as caregivers. A health shock is the most\ncommon shock to individuals that affects\nhousehold welfare and vulnerability, and is the\nmost important reason for descent of\nhouseholds into poverty in developing countries\n(Krishna 2007; Dhanaraj 2014).\n\n\nThe survey data indicates that refugee\nhouseholds with members with health-related\nissues (or specific needs related to health) are\nmore economically vulnerable than others in\nUganda. Indeed, they spent 26 percent less on\nfood and 24 percent less overall relative to those\nhouseholds without members with health-related\nissues.\n\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PSNs",
-          "confidence": 0.8598873615264893,
-          "start": 14,
-          "end": 15
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Households",
-          "confidence": 0.8763776421546936,
-          "start": 27,
-          "end": 28
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "vulnerability and\nassessment survey data",
-          "confidence": 0.9935287833213806,
-          "start": 273,
-          "end": 278
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.6962295770645142,
-          "start": 276,
-          "end": 277
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Refugee single parent households",
-          "confidence": 0.9482324123382568,
-          "start": 224,
-          "end": 228
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey data",
-          "confidence": 0.9985287189483643,
-          "start": 453,
-          "end": 455
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.7224271893501282,
-          "start": 453,
-          "end": 454
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Uganda",
-          "confidence": 0.9919885993003845,
-          "start": 479,
-          "end": 480
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee\nhouseholds",
-          "confidence": 0.9925381541252136,
-          "start": 457,
-          "end": 459
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Also, more economically vulnerable are**\n**households with members who have an**\n**impairment.** Households with individuals with\neither hearing, visual, or speech impairments\nspent 45 percent less on food, 27 percent less\non non-food items, and 41 percent less on\noverall expenditure. For students, these\nimpairments may have significant impact on\neducational progress. They can also prevent\nworking age individuals from entering the labour\nmarket and/or earning the same wages as those\nwithout these disabilities. Evidence in\ndeveloping countries suggests that\nsocioeconomic vulnerability and disability\nprevalence are positively correlated (Filmer\n2008; Yeo and Moore 2003; Elwan 1999).\n\n\n**Households that have children who are**\n**unaccompanied or separated from them are**\n**more economically vulnerable.** Households\nwithout unaccompanied or separated children\nspent 20 percent more than households with on\nfood expenditure (3,494 Ugandan Shillings or\n1.48 USD vs 2,791 Ugandan Shillings or 1.18\nUSD versus). In terms of overall expenditure,\nhouseholds without unaccompanied or\nseparated children spent 88 percent more than\nhouseholds with unaccompanied or separated\nchild (2.24 USD vs. 1.19 USD). All the\ndifferences are statistically significant at 1\npercent level.\n\n\n**There is no evidence that households with**\n**older** **people** **are** **more** **economically**\n**vulnerable.** Literature in developing countries\nfinds that households with older individuals\nconsume less and are more likely to be poor\n\n\n\n(Duflo 2003; A. Deaton and Paxson 1995; A. S.\nDeaton and Paxson 1998).\n\n\nIn a recent meta review on the topic of poverty,\nstudies found evidence of a decline in economic\nopportunity with age and showed that household\nwelfare decreases with age (Barrientos,\nGorman, and Heslop 2003). Given this evidence,\nthe authors of this brief investigated this but\nfound no statistical difference for overall\nconsumption between households with older\npeople and households without.\n\n\n**Why might PSN households be more**\n**economically** **vulnerable?** **Higher**\n**dependency ratio is a possible explanation.**\nThere are different types of specific needs.\nSome include disability and impairments that\ncould prevent or hinder working-age individuals\nfrom working or engaging in income-generating\nactivities. Within households, these individuals\nare economically dependent, and contribute to\nraising the dependency ratio.\n\n\nRecent studies indicate that the number of\nworking household members, as well as the\ndependency ratio, affect household welfare.\nSeveral studies find that households with higher\ndependency ratio experienced lower welfare and\nhigher poverty (Chen and Wang 2015; Biyase\nand Zwane 2018).\n\n\nComparing across dependency ratios, we find\nthat households with PSNs have a higher\ndependency ratio (2.66) than households\nwithout (2.18) (Table 1, and the difference is\nstatistically significant at 1 percent).\n\n\n\n_**Table 1: Dependency Ratio, by households with and without PSNs**_\n\nNon-PSNs PSNs T-test\nMean N Obs. HH size Mean N Obs. HH size Two-sided value\nPSN31 2.18 3146 6.04 2.66 2232 6.82 0.00\n\nChild. At risk 2.36 5232 6.35 2.97 146 7.18 0.00\n\n\n\nUnaccompanied and\nseparated child\n\n\n\n2.30 4845 6.23 3.08 533 7.60 0.00\n\n\n\nWomen at risk 2.35 5162 6.33 2.93 216 7.44 0.00\n\nOlder persons 2.33 4904 6.42 2.81 474 6.05 0.00\n\nSingle Parent 2.31 4973 6.30 3.26 405 7.38 0.00\n\nDisability 2.39 4777 6.29 2.24 601 7.03 0.11\n\n\n\nSerious Medical\nConditions\n\n\n\n2.38 4858 6.25 2.33 520 7.70 0.58\n\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Child. At risk",
-          "confidence": 0.6002487540245056,
-          "start": 619,
-          "end": 623
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Even after controlling for differences across**\n**households** **with** **and** **without** **PSNs,**\n**households** **with** **PSNs** **are** **more**\n**economically vulnerable.** In this section, we\ntest different socioeconomic factors that\ninfluence economic vulnerability using\nregression models. We use overall consumption\nexpenditure per capita to proxy for economic\nvulnerability.\n\n\nLet us assume that the welfare indicator is a\nfunction of household and individual\ncharacteristics ( \ud835\udc99\ud835\udc99\ud835\udc8b\ud835\udc8b ):\n\n\n\n\ud835\udc32\ud835\udc32\ud835\udc23\ud835\udc23 = \ud835\udec3\ud835\udec3\ud835\udc23\ud835\udc23\ud835\udc31\ud835\udc31\ud835\udc23\ud835\udc23 + \ud835\udec6\ud835\udec6\ud835\udc23\ud835\udc23\n\n\nwhere \ud835\udc9a\ud835\udc9a\ud835\udc8b\ud835\udc8b is the economic vulnerability indicator\n(overall consumption expenditure per capita per\nmonth), \ud835\udf37\ud835\udf37\ud835\udc8b\ud835\udc8b is a vector of parameters, and \ud835\udf3a\ud835\udf3a\ud835\udc8b\ud835\udc8b is\nthe idiosyncratic error term.\n\n\nTable 2 presents OLS results of the economic\nvulnerability model. Column (1) presents the\nOLS regression estimates.\n\n\n\n_**Table 2: Estimation results**_\n\n\nOLS regression\n\nHH Has a PSN member -0.07*\n\nHH size -0.23***\n\nHH crowding index -0.08***\n\nFood security index 0.02***\n\nOther control variables\n\nHousing type Yes\n\nSource for cooking  and    sanitation Yes\n\nAsset and animal ownership Yes\n\nLocation Yes\n\n\n\nThe coefficients explain how much the economic\nvulnerability is expected to increase (if the\ncoefficient is negative than consumption\nexpenditure per capita is lower) or decrease (if\nthe coefficient is positive than consumption\nexpenditure per capita is higher) when that\nvariable increases by one, holding all the other\nindependent variables constant.\n\n\nIn line with previous studies, some variables\nhave the expected effect on economic\nvulnerability. The household size affects the\neconomic vulnerability, with the higher the\nhousehold size the more economically\nvulnerable the household is. Vulnerability is also\nclosely linked to asset ownership where assets\nincluding livestock, phone, motorbike, and\nsewing machine are positively correlated with\nlower economic vulnerability. Indeed, the more\nassets a household has, the less vulnerable they\nare (Oluwatayo and Babalola 2020).The housing\n\n\n\ntype does not so much determine the household\neconomic vulnerability. This is likely due to\nrefugee housing stock being fairly uniform in\nrefugee settlements due to all refugees receiving\ncommon shelter supplies.\n\n\nImportantly, and in line with the above\ndescriptive analysis, the regression results\nconfirm that refugee households with persons\nwith specific needs are more economically\nvulnerable than other refugee households.\n\n\n**Conclusion and Implications**\n\nRefugees with specific needs face heightened\nrisks. UNHCR proactively identifies and supports\nthem with protection or assistance interventions\nto reduce the risk of lasting physical and\npsychological harm. Further, using recent data\nfrom a vulnerability and needs assessment\nsurvey, the authors of this brief found that\nhouseholds with members who have specific\n\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "PSNs",
-          "confidence": 0.5240098834037781,
-          "start": 32,
-          "end": 33
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "households",
-          "confidence": 0.959633469581604,
-          "start": 12,
-          "end": 13
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "OLS regression",
-          "confidence": 0.5936870574951172,
-          "start": 171,
-          "end": 173
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "vulnerability and needs assessment\nsurvey",
-          "confidence": 0.997908353805542,
-          "start": 501,
-          "end": 506
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9267945289611816,
-          "start": 505,
-          "end": 506
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee households",
-          "confidence": 0.6201292872428894,
-          "start": 454,
-          "end": 456
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "difficulties.\n\n\nAmong refugee households in Uganda,\nhouseholds with members who have specific\nneeds spent 23 precent less on food related\nitems, 18 percent less on non-food items, and 22\npercent less in overall expenditure. Further,\nsingle-parent households as well as households\nwith members who have health-related problems\nface the highest economic vulnerability among\nrefugee households.\n\n\nOne possible explanation of this heightened\nvulnerability facing persons with specific needs\nand their households is these households have\nfewer working members. Consequently, they\nhave a lower household income.\n\n\nThe economic vulnerability exists even after the\ndistribution of targeted assistance to persons\nwith specific needs and their households.\nWithout targeted assistance, the gap between\nhouseholds with and without persons with\nspecific needs is likely to grow even larger.\n\n\n**Bibliography**\n\n\n\n**protection of persons with specific needs in**\n**line with their vulnerabilities.** Cash and food\nassistance programmes should consider the\nnumber of persons with specific needs in\nhouseholds, particularly if there is disability that\nlimits the ability of working-age persons from\nworking or finding employment. Jobs or\nentrepreneurship programmes could identify\nopportunities suitable for individuals with\nphysical impairment who have the right skillsset.\n\n\n**Investing in human capital and skills for**\n**persons with specific needs will build their**\n**resilience and self-reliance.** Among children\nand adults, persons with specific need will likely\nbenefit from specialized training to be able to\nperform daily tasks or develop the skills to find\nsustainable employment. Investing in these\nindividuals will not only improve their overall\nwellbeing but also improve their ability to support\ntheir livelihoods now or in the future.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "_This brief was authored by Theresa Beltramo, Jed Fix and Ibrahima Sarr, UNHCR in collaboration with_\n_the UNHCR Uganda team. The opinions expressed herein are the authors\u2019 own. They do not_\n_necessarily represent the views of UNHCR_ .\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org/livelihoods 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/4a1f9402-c62c-3d9e-9c6e-66cfad7553bc/6012b2fd4.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_138/raw/doc_138_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,310 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Scope of the problem**\n\nAccording to WHO, around [22% of adults in conflict settings have mental health conditions.](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673619309341)\nThis is almost triple to non-conflict settings. There is no generally accepted estimate for\nchildren but it is clear that children who are [refugees, IDPs or who](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(11)60050-0/fulltext) [live in confict settings](https://international-review.icrc.org/articles/living-through-war-mental-health-children-and-youth-conflict-affected-areas)\nhave high levels of mental health issues. This increased prevalence of mental health\nconditions and psychosocial problems of displaced communities is determined by:\n\n\n\u22b2 adverse experiences and losses in the past in their homeplaces, during flight, and in\nrefugee or IDP settings\n\n\n\u22b2 current life conditions such as economic difficulties, daily stressors, a lack of\nsupportive social systems and the adequacy of assistance and protection\n\n\n\u22b2 how people perceive their future: solutions and real prospects to get a better life.\n\n### **UNHCR\u2019s engagement**\n\n\nThe overarching goal is to ensure refugees, internally displaced people (IDPs), stateless\npersons and other persons of concern to UNHCR have access to national services.\nHowever, in low- and middle-income countries that host most refugees and IDPs, services\nfor mental health and psychosocial support are grossly insufficient. In high income countries\nsuch services are often available, but not always accessible for or adapted to the needs\nof displaced persons. Therefore, UNHCR uses a twin track approach: providing essential\nservices for mental health and psychosocial support where needed and strengthening\ncapacity of and access to national systems where feasible.\n\n\nThe COVID pandemic prompted UNHCR to scale up our response and [adjust our modalities](https://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR Mental Health and Psychological support during COVID-19 - June 2020.pdf)\n[to identify and assist refugees and other persons of concern with mental health and](https://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR Mental Health and Psychological support during COVID-19 - June 2020.pdf)\n[psychosocial issues. Some mental health services were provided remotely, over telephone](https://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/UNHCR Mental Health and Psychological support during COVID-19 - June 2020.pdf)\nor internet, while essential clinical mental health care continued to be delivered safely and\nscaled up where possible. Trainings on basic psychosocial skills were conducted for health\nand protection staff, for partner staff, for community outreach volunteers, for helpline staff\nand for other frontline workers. Since the onset of the pandemic the 43 countries reporting\non MHPSS in the Global Humanitarian Response Plan for COVID-19, recorded over a half\nmillion of people who have been provided with essential mental health and psychosocial\nsupport services.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **MHPSS Approach and MHPSS Interventions**\n\nIntegrating MHPSS in the work of UNHCR is important to reduce emotional distress,\ndecrease suffering due to mental illness, improve the ability to function and cope, and\nstrengthen resilience. Moreover, a strong MHPSS response helps [strengthen protection](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/wp-content/uploads/MHPSS-and-Protection.pdf)\n[outcomes (and the other way round). MHPSS is not a sector but needs to be realized](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/wp-content/uploads/MHPSS-and-Protection.pdf)\nthrough UNHCR\u2019s work within existing sectors. UNHCR\u2019s way of working through crosssectoral collaboration and multi-functional teams is well suited to a coherent and efficient\ndelivery of MHPSS interventions within relevant sectors and to integrate an MHPSSapproach throughout all areas of work.\n\n### **Adopting an MHPSS approach**\n\n\nThis implies providing humanitarian assistance in ways that support the mental health and\npsychosocial well-being of persons of concern. MHPSS is relevant for all humanitarian actors\nand all forms of humanitarian action. This is strongly related to adopting the principles of\ngood humanitarian practice by:\n\n\n\u22b2 strengthening security, and providing basic needs and essential services (food,\nshelter, water, sanitation, basic health care, control of communicable diseases, and\neducation) in manners that protect the dignity of all people, including those who are\nmarginalized or isolated and who may face barriers to accessing services\n\n\n\u22b2 using participatory and community-based approaches in planning, implementing and\nmonitoring programmes\n\n\u22b2 applying an [Age, Gender and Diversity approach to humanitarian assistance](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/women/5aa13c0c7/policy-age-gender-diversity-accountability-2018.html)\n\n\u22b2 using clear and two-way communicating with communities and supporting communityled approaches.\n\n### **Integrating MHPSS interventions**\n\n\nThese are activities with as primary goal to improve the mental health and psychosocial wellbeing of persons of concern. Such activities are usually implemented via projects in health,\ncommunity-based protection, GBV, child protection, education including youth programmes,\npeacebuilding programmes, and livelihoods initiatives. MHPSS interventions can consist of:\n\n\n\u22b2 clinical services such as psychological or psychiatric treatment by a mental health\nprofessional\n\n\n\u22b2 focused psychosocial support can also be provided by people who are not specialized\nin MHPSS (including refugees and internally displaced people) and who have been\ntrained and supervised in specific methods (\u2018task shifting\u2019)\n\n\n\u22b2 fostering the capacity of persons, families and communities to support each other and\nto cope more effectively with/in challenging circumstances.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Strengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **An MHPSS approach in the work of UNHCR**\n\nOver the last years, UNHCR has promoted an MHPSS approach by making all staff in UNHCR\naware that our activities, including our own behaviour and attitudes, can impact the wellbeing\nof our persons of concern. Adopting an MHPSS approach is not so much about **what** we do but\nabout **how** we do our work. Examples of using an MHPSS approach are: including mental health\nand psychosocial wellbeing in needs assessments, training in basic psychosocial skills for first\nresponders (including volunteers who are refugees or internally displaced persons), integrating\nMHPSS considerations in case processing in registration resettlement, return and repatriation\nand in sectoral activities for WASH, shelter, nutrition and health.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **MHPSS interventions in UNHCR protection and** **solution strategies**\n\nMHPSS is an integral part of the UNHCR protection and solutions strategies. MHPSS\ninterventions can be integrated within services for health, protection and education, or\nimplemented through stand-alone programmes through dedicated MHPSS partners, with\nstrong linkages to the other sectoral areas. MHPSS has relevance for many and may easily\nbecome invisible or implemented with limited technical coherence. An important way to\npromote inclusion of MHPSS within various aspects of UNHCR work is through:\n\n\n\u22b2 including staff with MHPSS expertise in relevant multifunctional teams\n\n\n\u22b2 including MHPSS within multi sectoral needs assessments and in Refugee Response\nPlans and Humanitarian Response Plans\n\n\n\u22b2 ensuring MHPSS is a standing agenda item in sectoral coordination meetings for\npublic health, protection and education\n\n\n\u22b2 integrating MHPSS as a component in health, protection and education programmes\nor services.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Achievements around MHPSS in Public Health and** **Nutrition**\n\nMental health is an intrinsic part of primary and secondary health care. Among patients visiting\ngeneral health care, many have mental health conditions that often are not identified but can\nbe managed if staff are well trained. In the last five years, UNHCR has made major steps in:\n\n\n1. **Inclusion of MHPSS in regular health programming**\n\n\nIn 34 countries, UNHCR supports the implementation of mental health activities as a part of\nthe public health programming for refugees. The most common components were routine\nsupply of essential medication for mental disorders (in 85% of those countries), followed by\nthe availability of a mental health professional in the refugee setting (at least once per month)\nto manage people with complex mental health conditions in 74% of the countries. In 71% of\nthe countries at least one general health staff per UNHCR supported health facility had been\ntrained in the identification and management of mental disorders. The least often reported\nactivities were the training of community health workers to do follow-up for people with severe\nmental health conditions (62% of the countries), the facilitation of support groups/self-help\ngroups for refugees with mental health conditions (56% of countries)) and the provision of\nevidence-based brief psychological therapies in 18 countries (53% of countries).\n\n\n2. **Improve the quality of clinical approaches**\n\n\nIn 2019, a total of 161,137 consultations for mental, neurological and substance use issues\nwere done in refugee health facilities in refugee camps, which is 2.2% of the total number of\nhealth consultations. The psychotropic medication in the UNHCR essential medicine list is\nregularly updated and currently contains 12 medicines. To improve the accuracy of diagnosis\nand subsequent treatment, UNHCR updated the [mental health categories in the integrated](https://www.interventionjournal.org/article.asp?issn=1571-8883;year=2019;volume=17;issue=1;spage=13;epage=22;aulast=Ventevogel)\nRefugee Health Information System.\n\n\n3. **Including MHPSS in nutrition programming**\n\n\nFor their optimal growth and development, children require not only adequate nutrition but\nalso physical and emotional stimulation. This is especially important in the first years when a\nchild is developing rapidly and requires appropriate care. Inclusion of MHPSS in the support to\nchildren with nutritional problems and their mothers is therefore essential. UNHCR-supported\nnutrition programmes include the provision of counselling support to caregivers through the\n[Infant and Young Child Feeding programmes, infant friendly spaces at facility and community](https://www.unhcr.org/5c0643d74.pdf)\nlevel - where caregivers can access individual, peer or group counselling about how best\nsupport their children with physical stimulation, emotional support and through appropriate\nfeeding practices. Stabilisation centres (for the treatment of severe acute malnutrition with\ncomplications) often have infant-friendly stimulative environments.\n\n\n4. **Capacity building of staff**\n\n\nUNHCR envisions that all health facilities providing basic health services to refugees have\nstaff who can identify and managed mental health conditions. To facilitate this, since 2016,\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR essential medicine list",
-          "confidence": 0.6741645336151123,
-          "start": 322,
-          "end": 326
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9406616687774658,
-          "start": 322,
-          "end": 323
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "refugee camps",
-          "confidence": 0.5350160598754883,
-          "start": 300,
-          "end": 302
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR trained over 1000 primary health care staff in 14 operations in Africa through [mental](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30202535/)\n[health trainings, using](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30202535/) [clinical tools for mental health service delivery developed by WHO](https://www.who.int/mental_health/publications/mhgap_hig/en/)\nand UNHCR. Over the last five years, 45 UNHCR staff from all regions have participated in\nthe [Mental Health in Complex Emergencies course, organized with Fordham University. In](https://issuu.com/iiha/docs/mhce_16_syllabus)\n2020, UNHCR DRS provided technical support in emerging priority areas such as suicidal\nbehaviour in refugees and asylum seekers through a series of six global webinars.\n\n\n5. **Capacity building with communities**\n\n\nSince 2018, UNHCR introduced \u2018scalable psychological interventions\u2019: structured forms of\npsychological counselling, that are brief (5-8 sessions), adapted to the refugee situation and\ncan be delivered by people who are not specialized in mental health, including community\nmembers. The initial training can often be brief (1-2 weeks) if it is strongly competency-oriented\nand is followed by a system of supportive clinical supervision by a mental health professional.\n\n\nSince 2019, training, supervision and research around such interventions were done in\nseveral settings:\n\n\n\u22b2 [Interpersonal Therapy for Depression in Bangladesh, Peru and Tanzania](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/group-interpersonal-therapy-for-depression)\n\n\u22b2 [Problem Management Plus in Greece, Jordan and Iraq](https://www.who.int/mental_health/emergencies/problem_management_plus/en/)\n\n\u22b2 [Integrated Adapt Therapy in Malaysia and Bangladesh](https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/comments?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003073)\n\n\u22b2 [Community-based Sociotherapy in Uganda and Rwanda](https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/institute-of-life-and-human-sciences/schools-and-departments/department-of-psychological-sciences/research/costar/)\n\n\u22b2 [Self Help Plus in Uganda](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(19)30504-2/fulltext\r)\n\n\nMore info on the [MHPSS page on the UNHCR website.](https://www.unhcr.org/mental-health-psychosocial-support)\n\n\nIntegrated mental health and psychosocial support in Rohingya refugee camps\n\n\nThe MHPSS team of UNHCR Bangladesh in the Rohingya refugee camps supports the\npartners in health and protection to integrate MHPSS into their work. They trained 43\nnational psychologists who subsequently trained over 500 [community psychosocial](https://www.interventionjournal.org/article.asp?issn=1571-8883;year=2019;volume=17;issue=2;spage=296;epage=300;aulast=Uddin)\n[volunteers, para- counsellors and community health workers in the promotion of healthy](https://www.interventionjournal.org/article.asp?issn=1571-8883;year=2019;volume=17;issue=2;spage=296;epage=300;aulast=Uddin)\ncoping and maintaining psychosocial wellbeing.\n\n\nThe community based psychosocial group activities had a total of 238,074 attendees in\n2020. In the health centres, clinical mental health conditions are identified and managed\nby 57 general health staff who have been [trained in mental health with regular supervision](https://www.interventionjournal.org/article.asp?issn=1571-8883;year=2019;volume=17;issue=2;spage=130;epage=139;aulast=Tarannum)\nby a psychiatrist. This led to an increase in the number of psychiatric consultations in\nUNHCR- supported primary health care facilities from 2,865 in 2018, to 5,115 in 2019\nand 7,734 in 2020. Even with the access restrictions related to COVID-19, UNHCR and\npartners maintained essential mental health services and even increased the number\nof people served. Scalable psychological interventions were adapted to the Rohingya\ncontext and gradually introduced, such as [Integrated Adapt Therapy (25 psychologists](https://www.interventionjournal.org/article.asp?issn=1571-8883;year=2019;volume=17;issue=2;spage=149;epage=159;aulast=Mahmuda)\nand social workers trained and supervised) and [Interpersonal Therapy for Depression (23](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/group-interpersonal-therapy-for-depression)\npsychologists trained and supervised). In 2020, the psychologists and para-counsellors did\n10,095 individual psychotherapy sessions.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Achievements around MHPSS in Protection**\n\nProtection concerns can cause or aggravate MHPSS conditions while these in turn can\ncause or aggravate protection concerns. Addressing the mental health and psychosocial\nneeds [contributes to protection through strengthening the agency of people to effectively](https://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/wp-content/uploads/MHPSS-and-Protection.pdf)\naddress their protection issues. UNHCR encourages protection partners, including\ngovernments, to incorporate MHPSS approaches and to use MHPSS interventions,\nparticularly in delivering community-based protection; child protection; and prevention, risk\nmitigation and response to gender-based violence.\n\n\n1. **In Community-Based Protection (CBP)**\n\nThe goals of community-based protection (CBP) are [strongly related to MHPSS, particularly](https://www.refworld.org/docid/593ab6add.html)\nwhen it comes to strengthening family and community support. Most communities\nalready employ protection measures to support their wellbeing and to support vulnerable\nmembers, but certain coping strategies may harm or disadvantage the wellbeing of some.\nTo encourage CBP staff to engage with MHPSS, the CBP learning programmes integrate\nMHPSS in the curriculum. Many partners already integrate MHPSS in the work of community\noutreach volunteers, for example in urban settings in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq as well as in camp\nsettings e.g. in Bangladesh and Chad.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 8\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "[Community-driven safe spaces where communities can meet, can foster social](https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/573d5bc64.pdf)\nconnectedness and mutual support. Such approaches must ensure that disadvantaged\ngroups (older people, persons with disabilities, GBV survivors, women and girls at risk,\nunaccompanied and separated children, minorities, LGBTIQ+ people) are consulted and can\nfully participate. Apart from medical support, people with chronic or severe mental health\nconditions need support and practical care within their communities.\n\n\nCommunity care for people with severe mental health conditions in Kenya\n\n\nIn Kakuma, Kenya, UNHCR and partners started a programme for community-based care\narrangements for unaccompanied adults living with severe forms of disability and mental\nhealth conditions. Aim is to ensure they are adequately protected, assisted, and can live\na dignified life. Persons who have stayed for long periods in reception centres due to\nmultiple barriers they faced, were hosted by families who received support through NGOs.\nCommunity-support was mobilized via a buddy system (neighbours, friends, youth leaders,\nand community leaders). Read more [here.](https://svri.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2020-11-05/Protection%20across%20sectors%20EHA%20GLR.pdf)\n\n\nIntegrating MHPSS in community centres and outreach network in Syria\n\n\nIn Syria, UNHCR has a long tradition of providing mental health and psychosocial support\nthrough community-based networks, which started when the country hosted hundreds of\nthousands of Iraqi refugees. UNHCR\u2019s [pioneering approach centred around](https://www.interventionjournal.com/content/takamol-multi-professional-capacity-building-order-strengthen-psychosocial-and-mental-health) [community](https://www.interventionjournal.com/content/healing-through-sharing-outreach-project-iraqi-refugee-volunteers-syria)\n[outreach volunteers. They were trained and supervised in identifying persons in need of](https://www.interventionjournal.com/content/healing-through-sharing-outreach-project-iraqi-refugee-volunteers-syria)\nMHPSS support, safely referring them for appropriate services and providing necessary\nfollow-up including through home visits. This approach remained one of the cornerstones\nof UNHCR\u2019s work in Syria and has eventually expanded to the IDPs and host communities.\nCurrently, UNHCR supports 130 Community and Satellites Centres all over the country and a\nsystem of around 3,000 volunteers, among which 700 are specialized psychosocial support\nand have been trained in basic psychosocial skills and psychological first aid.\n\n\nThe Community Centres are the nucleus of a spectrum of protection services to persons\nwith specific needs, such as case management, awareness raising and recreational\nactivities, and individual and group counselling. In the first half of 2020, 2,896 IDPs, refugees\nand returnees were provided with MHPSS case management and 52,616 took part in social/\nrecreational activities.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2. **In Child Protection**\n\n\nUNHCR\u2019s child protection programmes aim to protect children from harm and to foster the\nemotional and social wellbeing of children. Many activities within [child protection contribute](https://www.refworld.org/docid/4fe875682.html)\nto MHPSS outcomes and child protection programmes often include specific psychosocial\nsupport components. Examples of integrated MHPSS within child protection work include\nstructured recreational activities led by community actors, focused programmes for\nadolescents such as peer-to-peer programmes, MHPSS elements within case management\nfor children with protection concerns, parenting programmes that provide guidance\nand support to caregivers on self-care and supporting children, and communication and\nbehaviour change initiatives on children\u2019s protection and wellbeing. Wherever possible,\nUNHCR supports children at risk and separated and unaccompanied children, access to\npsychosocial support services (including individual, family and group-based interventions),\nthrough referral to existing services and/or support to the provision of such services.\nThroughout the COVID-19 crisis, UNHCR and partners have invested in providing information\non emotions and behaviour of children in distress and how to help children to develop\nresilience in the face of adversity. Such information was distributed to children and youth\nand to parents and caregivers. Training on MHPSS, including psychological first aid and\nself-care, is integrated into training programmes for child protection staff, including frontline case managers and global training programmes including UNHCR\u2019s Global Basic Child\nProtection Package currently being finalised.\n\n\nChild protection programmes have long integrated psychosocial support components,\nand the evidence base underpinning MHPSS interventions is robust. [1] However, the quality\nand scale of the psychosocial support element of child protection programmes varies\nconsiderably, and limited availability of specialised mental health services for child protection\nactors to refer children to remain a major concern.\n\n\nEthiopia \u2013psychosocial support integrated within child protection\n\n\nIn the South Sudanese refugee camps in Gambella, children face many protection risks\nincluding separation from families, abandonment and neglect, child abuse, child marriage\nand child labour. UNHCR and partners make efforts to provide psychosocial support\ninterventions for children at risk and their caregivers. Despite the limited capacities and the\nlack of facilities, psychosocial approaches were used within the 35 child friendly spaces. For\nexample, 157 frontline child protection staff, refugee volunteers and members of communitybased structures participated in MHPSS trainings and mentoring sessions, while more\nthan 7,000 children and adolescents received community based MHPSS as part of child\nprotection programmes. As part of parenting support, more than 200 foster parents received\ntraining on positive parenting and basic psychosocial support.\n\n\n1 For example, in a recent [Rapid Evidence Assessment for Children on the Move psychosocial interventions, the vast](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/5fbd213c4.pdf)\nmajority of interventions with MHPSS components (37 out of 45) reported positive changes, seven no change, and one\na deterioration in aspects of children\u2019s psychosocial wellbeing.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 10\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Rapid Evidence Assessment for Children on the Move",
-          "confidence": 0.5850480198860168,
-          "start": 472,
-          "end": 480
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.6234074234962463,
-          "start": 528,
-          "end": 529
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "foster parents",
-          "confidence": 0.9510094523429871,
-          "start": 452,
-          "end": 454
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Thailand \u2013 a youth-led initiative around substance use\n\n\nBetween 2014 and 2019, UNHCR\u2019s Youth Initiative Fund supported small projects led by youth\nwho were returnees, internally displaced persons, refugees, asylum seekers, and host-country\nyouth. Some of those focused on mental health and psychosocial wellbeing. For example, in\nMae Ra Ma Luang, Thailand, a community-based organization of 48 youth developed activities\nto promote psychosocial support among refugee youth and to raise awareness about the\nimpact of drug and alcohol consumption amongst adolescents and youth.\n\n\n3. **In GBV**\n\nThe wellbeing of survivors stands at the heart of [holistic, survivor-centred approaches.](https://www.unfpa.org/minimum-standards)\nSurvivors of GBV often suffer from long-term psychological and social effects due to the\nsilence and stigma surrounding GBV, the fear for retaliation, feeling of shame and the lack\nof support by family and community. Psychosocial support is a critical emergency and longterm intervention, focusing on healing, empowerment and recovery. UNHCR\u2019s new [Policy on](https://www.unhcr.org/5fa018914/unhcr-policy-prevention-risk-mitigation-response-gender-based-violence)\n[the Prevention of, Risk Mitigation and Response to Gender-based Violence includes as one](https://www.unhcr.org/5fa018914/unhcr-policy-prevention-risk-mitigation-response-gender-based-violence)\nof the core actions that minimum multi-sectoral response services to address GBV survivors\u2019\nimmediate needs and concerns, must include mental health and psychosocial support in line\nwith a survivor-centred approach. Follow-up services, provided within appropriate, quality case\nmanagement, ensure coordinated support and care for survivors including those affected by\nsymptoms of mental health conditions such as depression and stress related disorders.\n\n\nUNHCR also explicitly asks partners to incorporate psychological first aid into the training\npackage for potential first responders to GBV survivors and to ensure safe disclosure and\nreferrals to safe, appropriate, quality services.\n\n\nProviding psychological support to GBV survivors in Colombia\n\n\nIn Colombia, the UNHCR-supported Regional Safe Space Network (RSSN) engages\npsychologists, social work professionals and health staff personnel to respond to survivors\nof gender-based violence. During the COVID-19 emergency the provision of emotional\nsupport, crisis intervention and case management continued, partially carried out by mobile\nphone continuing in-person support where possible.\n\n\nPsychological first aid and GBV for cultural mediators\n\n\nIn Italy, UNHCR provided training in Psychological First Aid and GBV, including guiding\nprinciples and survivor-centred approach, safe disclosure and referral, to Cultural Mediators\nwho were at the frontline when displaced persons disembarked after being rescued when\nattempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea. Many of the women and girls, who arrived were\nsurvivors of GBV and/or victims of trafficking. The Cultural Mediators were also offered\npsychosocial support at both a group and individual level.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Achievements around MHPSS in Education**\n\n[UNHCR\u2019s Refugee Education Strategy strives to integrate refugee children and youth into](https://www.unhcr.org/publications/education/5d651da88d7/education-2030-strategy-refugee-education.html)\nnational education systems. In order to enable refugee children to concentrate, learn and\ndevelop healthy relationships, UNHCR encourages education partners to include social\nand emotional learning (SEL) into the training of teachers; practices to identify learners in\nneed of focused mental health and psychosocial support; strengthening life skills training\namong children and youth and in making arrangements to include children and youth\nwith intellectual disabilities or mental health conditions. UNHCR also strives to pilot new\n[approaches to integrating MHPSS into education. For example, under the Humanitarian](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2Fhea-learning-series%2Fannouncement-of-hea-covid-19-challenge-finalists-f74f9c699931&data=04%7C01%7Cventevog%40unhcr.org%7C8494e73c97bd4c9a11c808d8a068c643%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C637435719483856034%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=t9fCWuval8BbcqTs%2FdSInFebs1k57lhfu%2F5mPTWoktA%3D&reserved=0)\n[Education Accelerator\u2019s Amplify Challenge for COVID-19, UNHCR supported a project](https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2Fhea-learning-series%2Fannouncement-of-hea-covid-19-challenge-finalists-f74f9c699931&data=04%7C01%7Cventevog%40unhcr.org%7C8494e73c97bd4c9a11c808d8a068c643%7Ce5c37981666441348a0c6543d2af80be%7C0%7C0%7C637435719483856034%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=t9fCWuval8BbcqTs%2FdSInFebs1k57lhfu%2F5mPTWoktA%3D&reserved=0)\ncalled \u2018Colors of Kindness\u2019. This is a podcast that seeks to bridge the learning gap and\nprovide psychosocial support to children and their families during and after the COVID-19\npandemic, through social and emotional learning (SEL) approaches. The app will be further\nimproved upon and a new version run on $11 feature phones to reach the widest possible\n[audiences. UNHCR has also included a specific checklist on MHPSS in the Back to School](https://www.unhcr.org/publications/brochures/5fdb7e724/covid-19-refugees-return-schooling-guidelines-2020-pdf.html)\n[COVID guidance.](https://www.unhcr.org/publications/brochures/5fdb7e724/covid-19-refugees-return-schooling-guidelines-2020-pdf.html)\n\n\nPsychosocial approaches in refugee education in Mali\n\n\nIn Mali, UNHCR has focused on embedding MHPSS throughout their education approach.\nThis includes delivering bespoke capacity building with teachers and educators both\nthrough training on addressing stress and trauma through MHPSS interventions, as well\nas building their ability to create warm, friendly and inclusive learning environments.\nWith the community, UNHCR Mali engages with messaging to build an understanding of\nthe importance of safe learning spaces, where students can be protected; and joining\nup community and teacher\u2019s engagement to provide relevant and inspiring role models.\nFinally, at a policy level, embedding MHPSS into education is seen as a crucial route for the\npromotion and preservation of a peaceful nation which is able to heal and foster a cohesive\nand participatory citizenship.\n\n\nRemote Learning and Psychosocial Support for Refugee Children in Kyrgyzstan\n\n\nCOVID-19 has had a serious negative impact on the socio-economic wellbeing of refugee\nand asylum-seeking children children in Kyrgyzstan. UNHCR was concerned about mounting\npsychosocial distress and increased risks for violence against children at home. In response,\nUNHCR initiated during the lockdown a series of online sessions for the children provided\nby refugee volunteers, supervised by psychologists and social workers from partner\norganizations. The sessions included tutoring, online social and recreational activities and\nprovided an entry point to monitor the wellbeing of children and their families and follow up\non identified issues.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 12\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Working in partnership with governments**\n\nUNHCR advocates for all refugees and other persons of concern to have access (by law and in\npractice) to national mental health services. These services are often weak in refugee hosting\ncountries and, where possible, UNHCR supports national governments in strengthening such\nservices and making them accessible to refugees and appropriate to their needs.\n\n\nGovernments in refugee hosting countries are increasingly aware of the need to strengthen\nthe national systems for MHPSS. The significant expertise that UNHCR and partners have\nbuilt in refugee settings provides UNHCR important leverage.\n\n\nSupporting the government of Niger in MHPSS response to COVID\n\n\nUNHCR Niger, due to its extensive experience with MHPSS for refugees, was invited\nto assist the government in the MHPSS planning in the COVID-19 response and was\ninstrumental in providing technical input to the MHPSS planning which the Word Bank\nagreed to support financially. UNHCR assisted the national government in a technical area\nthat is traditionally weak and ensured seamless integration of refugees, asylum seekers and\ninternally displaced persons in the national response.\n\n\nCapacity building of government staff in Iraq\n\n\nIn Dohuk Governorate in Iraq, UNHCR handed over the NGO-implemented MHPSS programme\nto the Directorate of Health. The move created synergies for integrated MHPSS interventions\nby increasing DoH capacity through UNHCR funded training and support. It also improved\nunderstanding of governmental social workers, psychologists and nurses about refugee issues.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **UNHCR directions and key priorities for 2021**\n\nMHPSS for refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced, stateless and other vulnerable\npopulations is critical for our programming. In 2021, UNHCR will focus on reducing the\nburden of mental health conditions, on psychosocial distress, and on mitigating the\nassociated protection risks for individuals, families and communities by using participative,\ncommunity-based and AGD inclusive responses. Whenever possible, UNHCR will work\nthrough existing national systems under the leadership of the host governments and\nadvocate for equal and equitable access to national services. UNHCR will support MHPSS\ntechnical working groups with government, NGO partners and other UN agencies to improve\nthe quality of the response. Furthermore, collaborative approaches with other UN agencies\nwill be explored when they are scaling up their MHPSS footprint.\n\n\n1. **UNHCR will use an MHPSS approach**\n\n\nUNHCR will ensure that personnel and partners will address the emotional and\npsychological needs of refugees, internally displaced, asylum-seekers and stateless persons\nin its protection and operational delivery.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Include mental health and psychosocial wellbeing in participatory assessments and\nmulti sectoral needs assessments. See the [Toolkit for assessing mental health and](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/health/509bb3229/assessing-mental-health-psychosocial-needs-resources.html)\n[psychosocial needs and resources.](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/health/509bb3229/assessing-mental-health-psychosocial-needs-resources.html)\n\n\u22b2 Include MHPSS needs in Refugee Response Plans and Humanitarian Response Plans.\n\n\n\u22b2 Strengthen the skills of first line responders in various sectors, including community\noutreach volunteers or community health workers, in identifying, safely referring, and\nassisting people in emotional distress or demonstrating challenging behaviour. This\ncan be done through workshops of \u00bd - 1 day (followed by regular supervision) on\n[Basic Psychosocial Skills for COVID responders or](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/iasc-guidance-basic) [Psychological First Aid.](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548205)\n\n\u22b2 Work towards systematically integrating MHPSS in global training programmes for\npersonnel working directly with persons of concern, by preparing and rolling out\ne-learning modules on MHPSS with the Global Learning and Development Centre.\n\n\n\u22b2 Strengthen the capacity of staff in Refugee Status Determination and Resettlement to\nwork with applicants with mental health conditions, using the new chapter in the [RSD](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5f3115564.html)\n[Procedural Standards.](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5f3115564.html)\n\n\u22b2 Ensure that the needs of people with chronic or complex mental health issues or with\npsychosocial disabilities are considered in the registration process, with referral to\navailable services.\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure that the specific needs of persons with chronic or complex mental health\nissues are considered in its operational delivery, including for housing, access to\nservices and cash assistance programmes.\n\n\n\u22b2 Include guidance on MHPSS indicators in the Result Based Management good\npractice indicators.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 14\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "MHPSS indicators",
-          "confidence": 0.8726933002471924,
-          "start": 468,
-          "end": 470
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.8026313185691833,
-          "start": 486,
-          "end": 487
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "2. **UNHCR will support that mental health services are made available for refugees and**\n**other persons of concern**\n\n\nIn UNHCR-supported primary health facilities, mental health should be a component of the\nservice provision. This can be promoted by 1) providing routine training and supervision of\ngeneral health workers (nurses, doctors) using the [mhGAP Humanitarian Intervention Guide;](https://www.who.int/mental_health/publications/mhgap_hig/en/)\n2) ensuring routine supply of essential medication for mental disorders; 3) making mental\nhealth professionals available to manage refugees with complex conditions and to provide\nclinical supervision to the general health workers; 4) training community health workers in\nidentification and follow up of people with severe or complex mental health conditions and\n5) fostering strong linkages between the public health and community-based protection\nprogrammes that UNHCR supports. This often requires the health partners to engage a\nmental health specialist (psychiatric nurse, psychiatric clinical officer or psychiatrist) to\nsupport general health services, but can also be done through dedicated MHPSS partner.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Routinely integrate mental health in UNHCR supported public health programmes.\n\n\n\u22b2 Support and strengthen the capacity of health workers to identify and manage mental\nhealth conditions.\n\n\n\u22b2 Monitor the mental health conditions in its refugee health information system.\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure that community health workers, often refugees receive training on MHPSS.\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure that in UNHCR-supported public health programmes with more than 25,000\nrefugees, a mental health specialist supports the treatment of people with severe and\ncomplex mental health conditions.\n\n\n\u22b2 Include psychotropics in orders for UNHCR country operations with direct medicine\nprocurement.\n\n\u22b2 Include MHPSS in the training for medical staff involved in [clinical management of](https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331535/9789240001411-eng.pdf?ua=1)\n[rape and intimate partner violence survivors.](https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331535/9789240001411-eng.pdf?ua=1)\n\n\u22b2 Advocate for access of refugees and other persons of concern to national services for\nmental health and substance use disorders where these exist and are of sufficient quality.\n\n\n3. **UNHCR will intensify its support children with malnutrition and their mothers**\n\n\nThe impact of malnutrition can be lifelong. During emergencies with food shortages,\ncaregivers may not be available or may not be able to support their children due to their own\nphysical and mental health strains. This affects the child and risks creating a vicious cycle.\nIntegration of psychosocial support to children and caregivers in the provision of nutrition\nservices is thus key.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Promote healthy child/caregiver interactions by working with caregivers on responsive\nparenting to facilitate children\u2019s emotional, social and physical development.\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure that nutrition response spaces include actions to foster the social and cognitive\ndevelopment of children.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "4. **UNHCR will encourage the use of brief psychological interventions**\n\n\nSelected partner staff (social workers, psychologists, nurses, case managers) and refugee\nvolunteers within health facilities or in community centres will be trained in scalable psychological\ninterventions such as [Problem Management Plus or](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548205) [Interpersonal Therapy for Depression.](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/group-interpersonal-therapy-for-depression)\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Introduce scalable psychological interventions have in at least three additional\nUNHCR operations compared to 2020.\n\n\n5. **UNHCR will introduce measures for suicide prevention in settings where this is a concern**\n\n\nThe COVID-19 pandemic and associated socio-economic problems and psychosocial stresses\nhave fuelled feelings of hopelessness and despair among refugees and other persons of\nconcern. Preventing and addressing suicidal behaviour requires a coordinated intersectoral\nresponse with attention for data collection, preventative activities, early identification and\nnon-stigmatizing referral pathways, training of clinical staff. The urgency of the issues that\nemerged during the COVID-19 pandemic provide an impetus for action in 2021.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Develop multi sectoral suicide prevention plans in three operations, where this is a concern.\n\n\n6. **UNHCR will facilitate community-based psychosocial support with communities**\n\n\nCommunity-led initiatives such as community centres, community-led organisations,\noutreach volunteer networks and self-help groups have a critical role in fostering social\nconnectedness and community support for refugees and other persons of concern. This\ncan help preventing and addressing mental health and psychosocial problems. To maximize\nthe role of such interventions, strong cooperation between teams for community-based\nprotection and MHPSS professionals is important. MHPSS should be a standard part of\ntraining in community-based protection programmes for UNHCR and partner staff and for\nvolunteers. Safe spaces can be used as entry points for MHPSS services. Within activities\nfor Communicating with Communities, messages around psychosocial issues and ways to\naddress them should be included.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Train and supervise community structures (outreach volunteers, community\ncommittees, volunteers in community centres) in basic psychosocial skills and\nidentification and referral.\n\n\n7. **UNHCR will promote the psychosocial wellbeing of survivors of gender-based violence**\n\n\nA central part of our GBV approach is to ensure quality case management for GBV\nsurvivors based on a survivor-centred approach and GBV guiding principles. In addition to\nthe provision of quality MHPSS services to survivors based on their needs and informed\nconsent, MHPSS aspects should be integrated throughout the case management cycle.\nSkills training for delivering scalable psychological interventions should be considered in\nthe training for case managers/ case workers including training GBV case managers/ case\nworkers on suicide risk assessment.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 16\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "It is also important to strengthen supportive community contexts for GBV survivors, e.g.\nthrough safe spaces for women and girls that provide social and emotional support, and\nthrough life skills training to cope with adversity. MHPSS frontline workers must be trained\non GBV guiding principles, survivor-centred approach and safe disclosures and referrals.\nSpecialized MHPSS services for GBV survivors at risk of self-harm must be strengthened.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure quality and appropriate GBV multi-sectoral response services include MHPSS\nfocusing on the wellbeing, empowerment and recovery of survivors.\n\n\n\u22b2 Build the capacity of GBV case managers and GBV case workers in basic psychosocial\nskills and in suicide assessment.\n\n\n\u22b2 Ensure effective referral pathways for safe access of GBV survivors to contextappropriate mental health and psychological services adapted to their ages and needs.\n\n\n8. **UNHCR will attend to the psychosocial needs of children at risk**\n\n\nThe provision of psychosocial support is an integral part of child protection, but\nunderfunding and uneven staff capacity limits the ability to integrate quality psychosocial\nsupport interventions. More attention is needed for structured support for parents, and for\nadolescents, especially adolescent girls and for youth.\n\n\nChildren should be supported through recreational activities, peer-to-peer support and life\nskills. Providing appropriate information to parents, caregivers and teachers on the emotions\nand behaviour of children and adolescents in distress and how to help them to recover from\nadversity and supporting community-led initiatives to identify, share and scale up solutions to\nsupport children\u2019s wellbeing.\n\n\nFor children at risk, the provision of Best Interests Procedures is of central importance.\nMHPSS staff should be trained on child protection principles and procedures, including safe\nidentification and referral of child protection cases and the Best Interests Principle.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Routinely integrate psychosocial support within child protection programming.\n\n\n\u22b2 Include MHPSS messages in communication initiatives with children, parents and/\nor communities.\n\n\n9. **UNHCR will promote the social emotional learning of refugee children**\n\n\nEducation partners can support educators to promote the skills and abilities that help\nchildren and young people interact and learn, by integrating [social and emotional learning](https://inee.org/resources/inee-pss-sel-training-module)\ninto education interventions which support refugee learners in formal and non-formal\neducational environments. This requires training of teachers or the development of teaching\nand learning materials.\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Introduce social and emotional learning in education approaches in at least three countries.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "10. **UNHCR will strengthen coordination and operational MHPSS capacity in refugee**\n**emergencies**\n\n\nMHPSS should figure as a standing agenda item in sectoral coordination meetings for health,\nprotection and education, where feasible accompanied by a multisectoral MHPSS technical\nworking group. In new emergencies, it is important to integrate mental health and psychosocial\nsupport within the humanitarian response, through internal support missions or requesting\nexternal [surge capacity for MHPSS for intersectoral coordination and capacity building.](https://www.drrteam-dsswater.nl/mhpss/)\n\n\nStrengthening technical competencies of UNHCR staff and partner personnel will continue\nthrough ongoing partnerships with academic institutions, around scalable psychological\ninterventions and emerging areas such as suicide prevention and substance use in\nemergencies and through the online course [Mental Health in Complex Emergencies.](https://issuu.com/iiha/docs/mhce_16_syllabus)\n\n\n**UNHCR commits to:**\n\n\n\u22b2 Deploy Dedicated MHPSS support in new refugee emergencies.\n\n\n\u22b2 Facilitate MHPSS coordination in all L2 and L3 refugee emergencies.\n\n\n\u22b2 Facilitate at least 40 staff to follow the online course Mental Health in Complex\nEmergencies.\n\n\nStrengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 18\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Strengthening Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in 2021 19\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        20
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**MORE INFORMATION**\n\n\n[https://www.unhcr.org/mental-health-psychosocial-support](https://www.unhcr.org/mental-health-psychosocial-support)\n\n\nUNHCR Public Health Section,\n\n\nDivision of Resilience and Solutions,\n\n\nUNHCR Geneva, hqphn@unhcr.org\n\n\nFebruary 2021\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/3fa15602-8fcb-30a6-8e97-d3fadf7ada43/602b94e37.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        21
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_139/raw/doc_139_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,395 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n# Refugee and Migrant Children in Europe\n### Accompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated\n\n#### Mid year Overview of Trends January - June 2017\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n##### Arrivals to Europe in First half of 2017 [1]\n\nIn the first half of 2017, **16,524** children arrived in Greece, Italy, Spain and Bulgaria, of whom **11,918** (72%) were unaccompanied or\nseparated children (UASC) [2] .\n\n\n##### Greece\n\nIn the first half of 2017, **3,020** [3]\nchildren arrived to Greece\nby sea, including 411 (14%)\nUASC, [4] a 95% decrease\ncompared to the first half of\n2016 (60,089).\n\n\nThe majority of children arriving\nto Greece by sea were from\nSyrian Arab Republic, Iraq,\nAfghanistan and Kuwait, while\nUASC were most commonly\nfrom Pakistan, Syrian Arab\nRepublic and Afghanistan. [4]\n\n\n##### Italy\n\nAmong the **12,239** children\nwho arrived to Italy, **93%**\n(11,406) were unaccompanied\nor separated. The number\nof UASC arriving increased\nby 7% compared to the first\nsix months of 2016 (10,640).\nAlmost half of them (46%)\noriginated from Guinea, C\u00f4te\nd'Ivoire, Bangladesh and\nThe Gambia.\n\n\n##### Bulgaria\n\nIn the first half of 2017, **270**\nchildren were intercepted\nat border crossing points\nand within the territory of\nthe country. [5] 37% were\nunaccompanied children (101)\nrepresenting an eight-fold\ndecrease compared to the first\nhalf of 2016. Most children\nwere from Afghanistan and the\nSyrian Arab Republic.\n\n\n##### Spain\n\nIn the first half of 2017, **995**\nchildren arrived by sea and\nland, most commonly from\nthe Syrian Arab Republic (373)\nand more recently, Morocco\n(272). Data on unaccompanied\nchildren is not available from\nthe Spanish Ministry of Interior.\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\nDemographic of Arrivals, Including Accompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated Children\n\n\n##### Greece Italy\n\n\n##### Bulgaria\n\n\n\n\n\n\n##### Spain\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**86%**\n\n\n\nACCOMPANIED\n\n\n\n\n\nAccompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated Children by\nCountry of Arrival\n\n\n\n**37%**\n\n\n**63%**\n\nACCOMPANIED\n\n\nNationality of Accompanied and Unaccompanied and\nSeparated Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\nAccompanied Children by Country of Origin and Arrival\n\n\nUASC by Country of Origin and Arrival\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_Source:_ _Hellenic Police, EKKA, Italian Ministry of Interior, Bulgaria State Agency for Refugees, Spanish Ministry of Interior._\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Demographic of Arrivals",
-          "confidence": 0.8785502910614014,
-          "start": 7,
-          "end": 10
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.7440232634544373,
-          "start": 0,
-          "end": 1
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7977810502052307,
-          "start": 6,
-          "end": 7
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7507179975509644,
-          "start": 6,
-          "end": 7
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\n\nGender Breakdown of All Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\nIn all counties of arrival, the proportion of boys compared to girls\nremains higher (almost 9 boys for every 1 girl).\n\n\nBOYS GIRLS\n\n\nGreece **59%** **41%**\n\n\nItaly **93%** **7%**\n\n\nBulgaria **70%** **30%**\n\n\nWhile for accompanied children across all countries this ratio is\nstill 3:2 ( **59%** boys vs. **41%** girls), on average, **93%** of all UASC\nwere boys.\n\n\nFor Italy, the calculation is based on the estimated 17,864 UASC\naccommodated in the government shelters according to the\nMinistry of Labour and not the total number of UASC who arrived\nin first half of 2017.\n\n\nAge Breakdown of Accompanied and Unaccompanied and\n\nSeparated Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\nAmong the **2,508** accompanied children who arrived to Greece\nand Bulgaria, 39% were between 0 and 4 years old, 53% were\nbetween 5 and 14 years old and 8% were between 15 and 17\nyears old. An age breakdown for accompanied children in Italy\nis not available, but their proportion is very low compared to\nthe 93% of children arriving in the first half of 2017 through the\nCentral Mediterranean Route that were UASC.\n\n\nAccompanied Children - Age Breakdown\n\n\n0 - 4 years 5 - 14 years 15 - 17 years\n\n\n\nGreece\n\n\n\n**39%** **54%** **7%**\n\n\n\nBulgaria **41%** **39%** **20%**\n\n\n_Source:_ _Hellenic Police, EKKA, Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees_\n\n\nThe majority of UASC who arrived to Italy, Greece and Bulgaria in\nthe first half of 2017 were boys between 15 and 17 years old (93%\noverall).\n\n\nUnaccompanied and Separated Children - Age Breakdown\n\n\n0 - 4 years 5 - 14 years 15 - 17 years\n\n\n##### Reception on Arrival in 2017*\n\nGreece\n\n- An estimated 18,500 children are in Greece on the\nmainland and the islands. Of them, 50% are in urban areas\n(apartments, hotels, etc.), 7% fewer than in March; 34%\nare in accommodation sites and 6% are in shelters for\nUASC. A further 10% are in Reception and Identification\nCentres, a threefold increase since March 2017.\n\n\n- In total, 217 unaccompanied children are in Reception and\nIdentification centres (up from 184 in March 2017), and 94\nunaccompanied children are in protective custody/detention,\nthree times more than in the first quarter of the year.\n\n\n- 1,131 UASC are in shelters for UASC, with an additional\n1,218 on the waiting list for shelter.\n\n\nItaly\n\n- 17,864 UASC are present in shelters for UASC, which\nare run by State authorities, non-profit and private sector\nentities, 16% more than in March 2017 (15,458). This\nincludes UASC who arrived in Italy both prior to and\nduring 2017. Sixty per cent of the UASC in the shelters\nare 17 years old. 5,226 UASC had reportedly left the\nreception system and were unaccounted for.\n\nBulgaria\n\n\n- 741 children, including UASC, are accommodated in\nreception centres in Sofia and southern Bulgaria, a 20%\ndecrease since March 2017.\n\n\n- All persons intercepted, including children and UASC,\nare routinely detained until they claim asylum. During the\nsecond quarter of 2017, children spent an average of 10\ndays in detention before being transferred to a reception\ncentre (37% shorter than the 16 days during the first\nquarter of 2017 but longer than the 8 days in 2016).\n\n\nSerbia\n\n- A total of 2,577 children are present in the country, some\n350 less than in March 2017. Children comprise 40%\nof the total number of refugees/migrants in the country,\n94% of whom are accommodated in state reception and\naccommodation centres.\n\nThe reception systems still vary greatly in quality across and\nwithin countries, sometimes even posing protection risks.\nThe large number of children who are not in shelters have\neither moved onwards or found themselves destitute on the\nstreets or in informal accommodation.\n\n_* Figures reflect the situation as of end of June 2017_\n_Sources: EKKA-Greece, UNICEF, Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Bulgaria State_\n_Agency for Refugees_\n\n\n\nGreece\n\n\nItaly\n\n\n\n**14%** **86%**\n\n\n**6%** **93%**\n\n\n\nBulgaria **18%** **78%**\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\n##### Asylum Applications and Decisions\n\nDuring the first half of 2017, European countries recorded **96,882**\nasylum claims involving children - a third of all asylum claims.\nThis is comparable to the number of applications registered in\nthe first quarter of the year. Half of all asylum seeking children in\n2017 came from only four countries: Syrian Arab Republic (26%),\nAfghanistan (12%), Iraq (9%) and Eritrea (5%).\n\n\nIn 2017, as in 2016, almost half of all children ( **44,283** ) sought\ninternational protection in Germany. Close to **60%** of them are\nyoung children (0 to 5 years old) and another **5,702** ( **13%** ) are\nUASC.\n\n\nOther countries that received large numbers of child asylum\nseekers in 2017 include Greece ( **8,113** ), France ( **7,600** ), Italy\n( **7,530** ), Austria ( **6,215** ), Sweden ( **3,912** ), Switzerland ( **3,280** ) and\nSpain ( **3,200** ).\n\n\nAsylum Applications Lodged by Children, including\nUnaccompanied and Separated Children between\nJanuary and June 2017 \u2013 by Country of Asylum\n\n\n\nDuring the first half of 2017, a total of **174,020** decisions on\nasylum claims involving children have been issued. Of them,\n**65%** were positive and **35%** rejected (compared to 68% and 31%\nrespectively in 2016). Among children with positive decisions,\n**50%** were granted refugee status (a slight decrease of 3%\ncompared to 2016), **32%** received subsidiary protection and **17%**\nreceived humanitarian status (up from 10% in 2016).\n\n\nThe trend of granting subsidiary protection and humanitarian\nstatus rather than refugee status has continued in 2017, including\nfor Syrians, Afghans and Iraqis. Moreover, many children saw their\nasylum claims rejected, particularly Pakistanis (74%), Nigerians\n(60%), Bangladeshis (52%), Afghans (32%), Iraqis (31%) and even\nSyrians (4%).\n\n\nDecisions on Child Asylum Applications\n\n\nMain nationalities of arrivals Main nationalities of arrivals\nin Greece in Italy\n\n\n\n\n\n4%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n48%\n\n\n\nGermany\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4%\n\n8%\n\n\n\n48%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n\n\n9%\n\n\n\nREJECTED ASYLUM APPLICATIONS\n\n\nREFUGEE STATUS\n\n\n\nSUBSIDIARY PROTECTION\n\n\nHUMANITARIAN STATUS\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\n\nRefugee and Migrant Children\u2019s Journey to Europe [7]\n\n\n- **Decision-making and mode of travel:** 75% of children\ninterviewed in Italy during February-April 2017 [8] made the decision\nto leave individually. In contrast, children in Greece tend to have\ntaken a joint decision within their family to flee countries marked\n\n\nmembers (24%). In the second quarter\nof 2017, just 4% of children in Italy and\n19% of children arriving via the Eastern\nMediterranean reported to have travelled\nwith family members.\n\n\ndecided to leave because of violence at home (as high as 47% of\nchildren coming from The Gambia). One in five girls overall stated\nthat they left because of early, forced or child marriage. Another\n18% of respondents reported that they left their homes due to\npolitical or religiously motivated persecution (as high as 31% of\nchildren from Guinea).\n\n\n- **Pull factors:** Among UASC who intended to reach Europe,\naccess to education (38%) and respect for human rights (18%)\nwere important factors which influenced children\u2019s decision\nto choose Europe as destination. In contrast, for children who\nplanned to travel to neighbouring countries in West or North\nAfrica, work was the primary reason to move.\n\n\n\n\n- **Length of the journey:** 56% of UASC spent more than 6\nmonths travelling to Italy; for 23% of them the journey lasted\nbetween 3 and 6 months; 13% reported travelling between 2\nweeks and 3 months and only 8% reached Italy less than 2 weeks\nafter leaving their departure country. Another survey found that\nchildren arriving to Italy travelled for one year and two months, but\nsometimes this could take up to two years. [8] Children from The\nGambia and Guinea took longer to arrive in Italy than, for instance,\nchildren from Nigeria and Egypt. The length of the journey was\nrelated to the distance travelled, but also to children\u2019s need to\nwork to finance the journey. Among children in Greece, the length\nof travel varied significantly, but was overall shorter than for\nchildren arriving to Italy.\n\n\n- **Risks along the journey:** Almost half of UASC interviewed in\nItaly (47%) reported to have considered risks they could encounter\non their journey before leaving, including being injured, killed,\ndrowned at sea, robbed or imprisoned. Yet, just 1% had considered\nthe risk of sexual abuse or consequences of discrimination.\n\n\nBased on the 2,580 interviews conducted with refugees and\nmigrants between April and June in Italy, similar to the previous\nquarter, 89% children interviewed responded positively to\n\n\nsites in Niger (25%), Algeria (17%) or Libya (98%).\n\n\n- **Kidnapping, arrest and violence:** UASC unanimously spoke\nof their stay in Libya and the sea crossing as the most traumatic\nparts of their journey. Almost half of them (47%) reported to have\nbeen kidnapped against ransom in Libya, and one in four children\n(23%) reported to have been arbitrarily arrested and held in prison\nwithout charges. Children participating in focus group discussions\ndescribed witnessing daily tortures, killings and sexual violence\nand reported having been beaten, burned and/or tortured. 63%\nof children, who went to Libya with the intention to work, left for\nItaly because they were terrified by the generalised violence in\nthe country. Children in Greece were also exposed to a number of\nrisks along the journey, including violence and exploitation.\n\n\n_Sources: UNICEF-REACH, Children on the move in Italy and Greece; IOM Displacement Tracking_\n_Matrix (DTM) Flow Monitoring Surveys Analysis (FMS)_\n_https://www.unicef.org/eca/REACH_ITA_GRC_Report_Children_on_the_Move_in_Italy_and__\n_Greece_June_2017.pdf_\n_http://iom.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapAndAppGallery/index._\n_html?appid=3af3e9630ab849e99e6970a29aa25ff5_\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.9106556177139282,
-          "start": 315,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "survey",
-          "confidence": 0.684726357460022,
-          "start": 315,
-          "end": 316
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Italy",
-          "confidence": 0.8369642496109009,
-          "start": 303,
-          "end": 304
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "interviews",
-          "confidence": 0.6843323111534119,
-          "start": 487,
-          "end": 488
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Italy",
-          "confidence": 0.9050835967063904,
-          "start": 303,
-          "end": 304
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees and\nmigrants",
-          "confidence": 0.8957988619804382,
-          "start": 490,
-          "end": 493
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "focus group discussions",
-          "confidence": 0.9141557812690735,
-          "start": 608,
-          "end": 611
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "children",
-          "confidence": 0.8009669780731201,
-          "start": 508,
-          "end": 509
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "IOM Displacement Tracking_\n_Matrix",
-          "confidence": 0.8069491386413574,
-          "start": 695,
-          "end": 699
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "DTM",
-          "confidence": 0.8838285207748413,
-          "start": 700,
-          "end": 701
-        },
-        "author": {
-          "text": "IOM",
-          "confidence": 0.8622608184814453,
-          "start": 695,
-          "end": 696
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Children",
-          "confidence": 0.82809978723526,
-          "start": 605,
-          "end": 606
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\n##### Relocation and Family Reunification\n\nDuring the first half of 2017 a total of **3,806** children were\nrelocated from Greece and **468** from Italy, including **109 UASC**\n(103 from Greece and 6 from Italy).\n\n\nOverall since the launch of the Emergency Relocation Scheme, as\nof 30 June 2017, 23,228 refugees and migrants, including **7,582**\nchildren, benefitted from relocation arrangements in Greece and\nItaly under the EU relocation scheme. Among them there were\nonly 275 UASC (268 from Greece and **7** from Italy).\n\n\nMost children from Greece were relocated to France (22%),\nGermany (22%) and the Netherlands (8%), while the children\nrelocated from Italy were transferred mainly to Germany (34%),\nSwitzerland (14%), Norway (12%) and the Netherlands (12%).\n\n\nAlthough the number of relocated UASC remains low with just\n275 UASC benefitting from the scheme as of June 2017, this is a\ntenfold increase compared to the end of June 2016, when just 26\nUASC had been relocated. Most UASC have been relocated to\nFinland (107).\n\n\nAccording to newly released Eurostat data, of the 761,000\nresidence permits for family reunifications reasons issued in\nEurope in 2016, just 16% (123,204) were granted to people of\nthe 10 most common nationalities of arrival, including 47,786\nSyrians. The majority of permits were issued in Germany (mainly\nto Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans), Sweden (for Syrians, as well as\nEritreans and Iraqis), Italy (mainly to Nigerians and Pakistanis) and\nthe United Kingdom (mainly to Pakistanis and Nigerians),\n\n\nThe number of children in family reunion procedures under the\nDublin regulations is underreported across Europe, but just in\nGreece during the first half of 2017 there were 625 requests\nregistered for family reunification.\n\n\nSection 67 of the Immigration Act 2016 required the UK\ngovernment to specify a total number of unaccompanied children\nto be transferred from Europe to the UK under the \u201cDubs\u201d\nscheme. In February 2017, the UK Government announced that\nthe scheme would be capped at a total of 480 children. Only\naround 200 children have been relocated under this scheme to\ndate, all in 2016.\n\n\nGreece\n\n\nOut of the 15,838 [9 ] people, who were relocated from Greece to\nother EU Member States by the end of June 2017, **6,910** (44%)\nwere children, including **268** UASC. The majority of children have\nbeen relocated in the first half of 2017, totalling 3,806 (55% of all\nchildren relocated since the launch of the scheme and including\n103 UASC). TARGET\n\n**66,400**\n\n\nADULTS\n\n**8,928**\n\nUASC CHILDREN\n\n\n\nOf the total returnees (428) from Greece to Turkey under the EUTurkey statement in the first half of 2017, **25** (6%) were children [10] .\nAll of them were returned with their families.\n##### Assisted with Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR) to Children and UASC [11]\n\n\nFrom 1 January to 30 June 2017, IOM provided AVRR support to\n**38,019** migrants, 25% less than the same period in 2016 (51,031).\nIn 2017, **27%** of migrants availing AVRR support were children,\nincluding 5% UASC).\n\n\nIn the second quarter of 2017, IOM assisted **19,088** migrants to\nreturn voluntarily from 81 host countries to 135 countries of origin.\n73% were returned from European countries and almost a quarter\n( **24%** ) of all beneficiaries were children, among which 5% were\nUASC. Returns were most commonly from Germany (42%).\n\n##### Children Resettled to Europe in 2016\n\n\nOf the total resettled refugees (18,175) to Europe in 2016, **49%**\nwere children (27% boys and 22% girls). In the first six months\nof 2017, cases relating to 22,000 refugees were submitted for\nresettlement to European countries. [12]\n\n\n_Source: Europe Resettlement 2016, UNHCR_\n\n\n6\n\n\n\nItaly\n\n\nAs of June 2017, only 7,390 refugees and migrants were\nrelocated from Italy, including **672** children (9% including 7\nUASC).\n\n\nAmong the 672 relocated children, more than two thirds (468)\ndeparted during the first six months of 2017. In contrast, during\nthe same period in 2016, just 7 children benefited from the\nrelocation scheme.\n\n\nTARGET\n\n**39,600**\n\n\nADULTS\n\n**6,718**\n\n\nUASC\n\n\n\n**7**\n\n##### Returns from Greece to Turkey\n\n\n\nCHILDREN\n\n**672**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM October 2017\n\n\n**Endnotes:**\n\n1. Data on arrivals is partial due to the large scale of irregular movements\nand reflects only sea arrivals for Greece and Italy. Data for Spain\ninclude both sea and land arrivals.\n\n2. Separated children are children separated from both parents, or from\ntheir previous legal or customary primary caregiver, but not necessarily\nfrom other relatives. These may, therefore, include children\naccompanied by other adult family members. Unaccompanied children\nare children who have been separated from both parents and other\nrelatives and are not being cared for by an adult who, by law or custom,\nis responsible for doing so. (IASC)\n\n3. Arrival figures for Greece are collected in the framework of UNHCR\nborder activities and are provided by Hellenic Coastguard and\nHellenic Police.\n\n4. During the same period of time, a total of 2,557 referrals were made\nto the Greek National Centre for Social Solidarity (EKKA) based on\nchildren identified on islands and mainland Greece, including near the\nland border with Turkey.\n\n\n##### Limitation of available data on Children and UASC:\n\nThere is no comprehensive data on arrivals (both adults\nand children) in Europe, especially by land and air, as such\nmovements are largely irregular and involve smuggling\nnetworks, which are difficult to track. If collected, data is rarely\ndisaggregated by nationalities, risk category, gender or age.\n\n\nReliable data on the number of UASC either arriving to, or\ncurrently residing in, different European countries is often\nunavailable. The number of asylum applications filed by\nUASC is used to provide an indication of trends but does not\nnecessarily provide an accurate picture of the caseload due\nto backlogs in national asylum systems, onward irregular\nmovements or not applying for asylum at all. In addition, due\nto different definitions and national procedures and practices,\ncollecting accurate data on separated children specifically is\nvery challenging (e.g. separated children being registered as\neither accompanied or unaccompanied). It should also be\nnoted that complete data for the first half of 2017 on children\nand UASC asylum applications for all EU member states was\nnot available on the Eurostat website at the time when this\nfactsheet was released.\n\n\n_**Sources:**_ _Hellenic Police, Greek National Centre for Social Solidarity (EKKA), Italian_\n_Ministry of Interior, Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees, Spanish Ministry of_\n_Interior, Eurostat, BAMF-Germany, IOM, UNHCR and UNICEF_\n\n\n\n5. During the same period of time, 599 children applied for asylum in\nBulgaria, of which 253 were UASC. The higher number of asylum\napplications is due mainly to the fact that there is no systematic\nregistration of people arriving in the country, and some children may\nhave claimed asylum in reception centres without being intercepted or\nidentified by national law enforcement authorities at border crossing\npoints or within the territory of the country.\n\n6. Figures reflect the situation as of the beginning of July 2017\n\n7. Findings in this section are based on interviews with children more\nthan 14 years of age. As a result, UASC on the Eastern Mediterranean\nRoute may be overrepresented and findings may not be representative\nfor all children arriving to Greece.\n\n8. Interviews were conducted as part of the published study by UNICEFREACH, \u2018Children on the Move in Italy and Greece\u2019, June 2017\n\n9. This number reflects all relocations since the launch of the EU\nrelocation scheme in late 2015. In Greece, 23% or 15,838 out of\n66,400 originally foreseen have been relocated, while for Italy, the\nequivalent figures are 18% or 7,390 out of 39,600 originally foreseen.\n\n10. Since the start of 2016, 1,229 people have been returned from Greece\nto Turkey, of which 69 were children (6%).\n\n11. The data provided here is provisional and should therefore be\nconsidered as an estimation.\n\n12. UNHCR assisted submissions for resettlement -  demographic\ninformation is only available annually\n\n##### About the factsheet\n\n\nThis factsheet is jointly produced by UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM with the aim\nto support evidence-based decision-making and advocacy on issues related to\nrefugee and migrant children.\n\n\nThe document provides an overview of the situation in Europe with regards to\nrefugee and migrant children (accompanied and UASC). It compiles key childrelated data based on available official sources: arrival, asylum applications,\nasylum decisions, profiling of arrivals, relocation from Greece and Italy under\nthe EU relocation scheme, as well as returns from Greece to Turkey under the\nEU-Turkey statement.\n\n\nThe present factsheet covers the first half of 2017 and is produced on quarterly\nbasis to provide up-to-date information on refugee and migrant children,\nincluding unaccompanied and separated children.\n\n\n\nIOM:\n**Ivona Zakoska Todorovska**\ndtmmediterranean@iom.int\n\n\n\nUNICEF:\n**Tsvetomira Bidart**\ntbidart@unicef.org\n\n\n\nFor further information or any\nquestions concerning this\nfactsheet please contact:\n\n\n\nUNHCR:\n**Edgar Scrase**\nscrase@unhcr.org\n\n\n\n**Jointly compiled and produced by:**\n\n\n\n7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Data on arrivals",
-          "confidence": 0.937620997428894,
-          "start": 15,
-          "end": 18
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6635602712631226,
-          "start": 0,
-          "end": 1
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.8924132585525513,
-          "start": 34,
-          "end": 35
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "available data on Children",
-          "confidence": 0.7180265188217163,
-          "start": 208,
-          "end": 212
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.847076952457428,
-          "start": 229,
-          "end": 230
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UASC",
-          "confidence": 0.5781245231628418,
-          "start": 301,
-          "end": 302
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "EU member states",
-          "confidence": 0.7020918726921082,
-          "start": 401,
-          "end": 404
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.8354901075363159,
-          "start": 392,
-          "end": 393
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "separated children",
-          "confidence": 0.8310415148735046,
-          "start": 357,
-          "end": 359
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Children on the Move in Italy and Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.5776179432868958,
-          "start": 619,
-          "end": 627
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNICEFREACH",
-          "confidence": 0.9257670640945435,
-          "start": 616,
-          "end": 617
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.9708191156387329,
-          "start": 630,
-          "end": 631
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2016",
-          "confidence": 0.8891515731811523,
-          "start": 698,
-          "end": 699
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "factsheet",
-          "confidence": 0.8493016958236694,
-          "start": 760,
-          "end": 761
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6933696866035461,
-          "start": 767,
-          "end": 768
-        },
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.9414281845092773,
-          "start": 799,
-          "end": 800
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.5719996094703674,
-          "start": 868,
-          "end": 869
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.9802541136741638,
-          "start": 785,
-          "end": 789
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/071e3439-19b7-30fe-8447-02cb784941c2/60348.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_14/raw/doc_14_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,182 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|Col5|Col6|Col7|Col8|Col9|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n||||||||||\n||||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"||||||||New\"Arrivals\"Recep;on/<br>Help\"Desk\"<br>Hiring\"Prac;ces\"|\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n|40\"<br>50\"|||||||||\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Patrick \r Hanson**\n\nCountry \r FSA\nhanson@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9894 \r 1297\n\n\n**Alaeddin \r Alrashdan**\n\nAssistant \r FSA\nalrashda@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9644 \r 3784\n\n\n**Ramiz \r Habit**\nField \r Safety \r Associate\nhabit@unhcr.org\n+962 \r (0)7 \r 9720 \r 0271\n\n\n\n_**UNHCR \r Field \r Safety \r Unit \r Contacts**_\n\n\n**Ammar \r Samain**\n\nMafraq \r FSA\nsamain@unhcr.org\n\n\n\n**Phil \r Priestley**\nFSA \r (Reporting \r & \r Information)\npriestle@unhcr.org\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/377bc627-07e6-3fc5-9e61-e57a3d19c662/1403-ZaatariSafetySecurityReport%282013-final%29.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_140/raw/doc_140_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,168 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "As COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out, ensuring\nequitable distribution across and within countries\nis a key challenge. Stateless people risk being excluded from national immunization plans regardless\nof whether their age, health status or role in society\nwould otherwise place them in a priority group.\n\n\nThe issue of access to civil registration in relation to\nCOVID-19 also warrants special attention. More than\na year into the pandemic, it has become evident that\ndisruptions in birth registration services have created new risks of statelessness. A number of countries\nwhere birth registration was not considered an \u2018es\n\n\nsential service\u2019 are reporting lower birth registration\nrates due to the partial or complete suspension of\nbirth registration services as part of mitigation efforts.\nThere are also reports of the discontinuation of birth\nregistration campaigns targeting hard-to-reach populations or populations who for other reasons are\nunlikely to be covered by regular birth registration\nservices. If resultant backlogs are not prioritized for\nresolution in the period to come, many children may\nwind up at risk of statelessness.\n\n\n\n1 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to vaccines\n\n## **Access to vaccines**\n\n### **_At present the question of whether or not stateless_** **_people will be able to access vaccines remains_** **_unclear in most countries that UNHCR has_** **_information about._**\n\n\n\nAs of 26 May, some 166 States globally have begun\nvaccination campaigns. [4] In order to be effective,\nvaccination programs need to be as inclusive as\npossible of all persons resident on the territory, and\nconsiderations as to which groups are prioritized for\nthe vaccine should be based on public health considerations. _At present, however, the question of_\n_whether or not stateless people will be able to ac-_\n_cess vaccines remains unclear in most countries that_\n_UNHCR has information about_ . As explained in more\ndetail below, the majority of countries that have provided information about their plans to UNHCR have\nnot clearly addressed the question of the inclusion\nof stateless people one way or the other. In addition,\nit seems that most States have not yet determined\nhow to address the situation of people who have no\nlegal proof of their identity, a problem facing many\nstateless people. The present moment is therefore\na critical juncture for States and others to consider\nthese issues carefully and to share best practices in\nrelation to them.\n\n\n\n**Equitable access across countries**\n\n\nPublic health experts understood from the start of the\npandemic that once vaccines became available, equitable and ultimately universal access to vaccination\nwould be key. This triggered global leaders to launch\nthe COVAX Facility, [5] a global collaboration aimed\nat accelerating the development and production of\nCOVID-19 vaccines so as to guarantee fair and equitable access for every country. The initial aim is for\nvaccines to be made available as quickly as possible\nto at least 20% of the populations of all 190 participating countries or territories and so that all States\ncan target those at highest risk of contracting the virus, including health care workers, and those most vulnerable to suffering severe consequences if they do.\nThis includes 92 low- and middle-income countries\neligible for support through the COVAX Advanced\nMarket Commitment (AMC), a financing instrument\ndesigned to support equitable access to vaccines regardless of income level. As of 31 May, COVAX had\nshipped over 77 million COVID-19 vaccine doses to\n127 participants. [6]\n\n\n\n2 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to vaccines\n\n\nA separate \u2018Humanitarian Buffer\u2019 of up to 5% of the\ntotal number of doses available through COVAX was\ncreated to facilitate access to vaccines for high-risk\nand vulnerable populations, including stateless people, [7] in humanitarian settings where there have been\nunavoidable gaps in national vaccine plans despite\nadvocacy efforts. [8]\n\n\n**Equitable access within countries**\n\n\nIn December 2020, the World Health Organization\nreleased the [Values Framework for the Allocation](https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/334299/WHO-2019-nCoV-SAGE_Framework-Allocation_and_prioritization-2020.1-eng.pdf?ua=1)\n[and Prioritization of COVID-19 Vaccination intended](https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/334299/WHO-2019-nCoV-SAGE_Framework-Allocation_and_prioritization-2020.1-eng.pdf?ua=1)\nto offer guidance globally on the allocation and prioritization of populations to receive COVID-19 vaccines.\nThe Framework complements the principles on equitable access and fair allocation of COVID-19 vaccines\ndeveloped for the COVAX Facility. It provides that\nvaccine prioritization within countries should take into\naccount the vulnerabilities, risks and needs of groups\nwho, because of underlying societal, geographic or\nbiomedical factors, are at risk of experiencing greater\nburdens from the COVID-19 pandemic. The guidance\nsuggests that disadvantaged ethnic, racial, gender,\nand religious groups, vulnerable migrants in irregular situations, nomadic populations and hard-to-reach\npopulations should be prioritized. Many stateless\npopulations fall within these groups given that more\nthan 75% of the world\u2019s known stateless populations\nbelong to minority groups. [9]\n\n\nUNHCR is committed to the allocation principles of\nthe COVAX initiative, and has advocated for inclusion\nof refugees, internally displaced and stateless popu\n\n\nlations in national vaccination programs [10] as well as\nuse of the humanitarian buffer to reach these populations where they would otherwise not be reached.\nUNHCR is also calling on governments to adopt innovative approaches to overcome some of the potential practical obstacles that stateless persons face to\naccess vaccines, including the lack of legal identity\ndocumentation.\n\n\nAs of 1 June, UNHCR has at least some information\non the national vaccination plans and programs of 157\ncountries. In the great majority of these, it is unclear\nfrom the language of the plans and other information\navailable so far whether stateless persons will be able\nto access vaccines. This is not unusual or necessarily\nproblematic, as most plans do not single out specific population groups. In some 47 countries, stateless\npersons would seem to be included according to the\nlanguage of the plans or based on assurances by the\nauthorities to UNHCR, but there is limited information available concerning actual practice to date. At\nthe same time, of the 157 countries that UNHCR has\ninformation about, 2 have stated that stateless persons are excluded from accessing vaccines as part of\nthe national vaccination program. Whether or not the\nplans specifically mention or envision the inclusion of\nstateless persons, as a practical matter there are a\nnumber of reasons why stateless people and others\nwho may lack certain forms of identification could go\nunvaccinated. There is therefore a need for urgent attention by States and others to the risks of exclusion\nof stateless persons, and for greater clarity on the\nsubject as States continue to refine and implement\ntheir national plans.\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to vaccines\n\n\n**Potential challenges to ensuring that**\n**stateless persons access vaccines**\n\n\nDespite public health guidance and human rights\nstandards [11] lining up in favor of the general inclusion\nof stateless persons in vaccination programs, in practice they risk being excluded. Lower vaccination rates\namong stateless persons predate the COVID-19 pandemic, as stateless persons generally face obstacles\nwhen accessing vaccination services. Stateless persons are likely to experience additional constraints in\nthe current immunization environment due to the limited supply of vaccines globally. A number of potential challenges related to ensuring stateless persons\nbenefit from vaccines can be identified.\n\n\n**Nationality or legal status** . Stateless people risk\nbeing excluded due to lack of nationality of the\ncountry of residence. A number of national vaccination roll-out strategies either prioritize their\nnationals over non-nationals, explicitly exclude\nnon-nationals without legal status in the country,\nor make no explicit provision for non-nationals to\nbenefit from vaccines.\n\n\n**Lack of identity documentation.** Stateless people may be excluded from vaccination programs\neither deliberately or de facto because they lack\nproof of legal identity. While some countries expressly bar undocumented persons from getting\nvaccinated, in other contexts they are in principle\neligible but in practice face obstacles linked to\ntheir lack of identity documentation. The documentation requirement in practice stems from the\nneed to keep track of who has been vaccinated,\nto invite persons for subsequent inoculations and\nto track the safety of vaccines. However, given\nthat globally some 1 billion persons are estimated to lack proof of legal identity, [12] the requirement\nthat people show proof of identity to register for\nand/or receive vaccines may well undermine the\neffectiveness of vaccination programs. Alternative\narrangements therefore need to be considered\nfor those who lack proof of legal identity. The lack\nof documentation also makes it harder for authorities to reach these populations as they typically\ndo not appear in civil registers or national population registers; their lack of legal identity documents has effectively made them invisible to the\nauthorities.\n\n\n\n**Lack of awareness.** The majority of known stateless people and those at risk of statelessness belong to minority groups and many live in remote,\nhard-to-reach locations. They may not speak the\ndominant national language and may or may not\nbe literate. For a variety of reasons, they thus may\nnot be aware of the possibility to get vaccinated\nand may face difficulties in obtaining information\non how to access vaccines, especially where this\nrequires navigating administrative systems. Information may not be provided in a language they\nspeak or may be transmitted through a means of\ncommunication that they do not have access to.\nDue to a general lack of data on stateless populations, regular outreach efforts are likely to overlook these groups.\n\n\n**Fear of coming forward for vaccination.** Many\nstateless persons do not have legal status in the\ncountry where they live and are therefore generally reluctant to approach the authorities lest they\nbe subject to arrest or detention. Registering and\ncoming forward for vaccination is likely to be perceived as posing similar risks.\n\n\n**Prohibitive cost of vaccination.** Many stateless\npersons do not have access to healthcare insurance due to lack of legal identity and legal status,\nwhich can make accessing vaccination prohibitively costly. While vaccination in many countries\nis free of charge for nationals, in many countries\nthis will not be the case for non-nationals without\nlegal status.\n\n\n**Discriminatory and inconsistent vaccination dis-**\n**tribution practices.** While most governments are\ndeveloping vaccine distribution plans at a national\nlevel, implementation is often managed locally by\na host of different actors. The urgency behind the\nroll-out of vaccination plans and lack of training\nand monitoring of vaccine distribution risks leading to inconsistent and discriminatory practices.\nAlternative arrangements for those not able to\nmeet the usual requirements for vaccine registration, such as a national identity document, may not\nbe consistently applied. This may lead to stateless\npersons and other groups not being able to get\nvaccinated despite being eligible.\n\n\n\n4 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to vaccines\n\n### **_Ethical considerations linked to the introduction_** **_of vaccine passports are being debated, as they_** **_will clearly disadvantage populations unable or_** **_unwilling to access vaccination._**\n\n\n\n**Additional risks that may arise from**\n**excluding stateless persons**\n\n\nAs highlighted above, mitigation efforts and vaccination plans need to be as inclusive as possible of all\npersons residing in a country in order to sustainably\nslow the transmission of the virus. Excluding certain\ngroups carries the risk of ongoing transmission not\nonly among these populations but all groups. In addition to public health considerations, exclusion from\nvaccination programs risks inflaming xenophobia and\nstigmatization as excluded groups may be perceived\nto be at higher risk of contracting the virus. Being\nfeared as a source of potential infection may also further inhibit excluded groups\u2019 access to services and\nlivelihoods.\n\n\n**Implications of the introduction**\n**of vaccine passports**\n\n\nAs governments around the world explore the roll\nout of vaccine passports in response to the COVID-19\npandemic, some governments have already introduced such documentation schemes. The premise of\na vaccine passport is straightforward: a document indicates that a person has been vaccinated so that he/\nshe can accordingly engage more freely in public life\nand travel without adding to the spread of the virus.\nEthical considerations linked to the introduction of\nsuch schemes are being debated, as they will clearly\ndisadvantage populations unable or unwilling to access vaccination. The health crisis has already exacerbated the vulnerability and marginalization of stateless groups and vaccine passports will make things\nworse still for any stateless populations unable to be\nvaccinated. There is a clear risk of a vicious cycle by\nwhich vulnerable groups excluded from vaccination\nare made even more socio-economically and generally vulnerable, including to severe consequences of\nthe virus, as a result of exclusion.\n\n\n\n**Good practices**\n\n\nA number of national vaccination strategies do not\ndifferentiate between residents based on legal status\nor nationality:\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Spain**, all persons residing on the territory,\nincluding migrants in an irregular administrative\nsituation, are included in the national vaccination\nstrategy. The strategy also establishes that migrants in detention are a priority group.\n\n**\u25a0** Stateless persons in **Portugal** are included in\nthe national vaccination plan on an equal footing\nwith nationals, per priority categories established\nbased on health risk.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Turkmenistan**, both refugees and stateless\npersons are included in the COVID-19 national\nvaccination plan. In March 2021, those falling\nunder the public health-based prioritization criteria, including undocumented stateless persons,\nbegan being invited for vaccination.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Lebanon**, stateless persons are included in\nnational vaccination plans and can register for\nvaccines. Following advocacy efforts, a statelessness option was added to the required nationality\nfield in the online registration platform, enabling\nstateless persons to register.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Kuwait**, the authorities issued a decision in December 2020 that in principle allows all persons\non the territory to access medical services linked\nto COVID-19, including vaccination. Individuals\nwho have not regularized their status with the\ngovernment and/or do not possess an ID card\nare covered by this decision.\n\n\nA good practice was set in the **United Kingdom**\nwhere a firewall was created between vaccination\nand immigration services. Everyone is entitled to the\nvaccine free of charge. Undocumented migrants, including stateless people, will be able to receive the\nvaccine and their data will not be shared with the police. To encourage undocumented persons to get the\n\n\n\n5 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "vaccine, the authorities have conducted an information campaign in different languages and are collaborating with NGOs to reach all such persons.\n\n\nTo respond to the challenge of some people lacking\nidentity documents, a number of States have adopted\nalternative arrangements:\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Uganda**, the Government rolled out a nationwide vaccination plan for all persons on its\nterritory starting with those assessed to be most\nat risk. To receive a vaccine, an identity document generally needs to be furnished, but those\nwithout any type of identity document can obtain\nan introduction letter from their local authorities\nto receive the vaccine.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Kenya**, a person generally needs to show an\nidentity document to be vaccinated. The Government has indicated however that those who\nqualify for vaccination but who do not have an\nidentity document can obtain letters from local\nauthorities which can be used for vaccine registration.\n\n**\u25a0** **Jordan** commenced vaccinations in January\n2021 and announced that all persons living on\nJordanian soil are eligible to receive a vaccine\nfree of charge. In addition, refugees who have no\n\n\n\npassports or ID, including stateless refugees, can\nregister for the vaccine platform using the UNHCR registration certificate number.\n\n\nCertain countries have included stateless persons in\ntheir national healthcare system, which enables them\nto access vaccines:\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Kazakhstan**, free medical assistance in relation to COVID-19 is provided to non-nationals,\nincluding refugees, asylum-seekers and stateless\npersons. Refugees and recognized stateless\npersons are included in the COVID-19 national\nvaccination plan. [13]\n\n**\u25a0** In February 2021, **Colombia** announced the\ngrant of temporary legal status for ten years to\nall Venezuelan migrants who entered the country\nprior to 2021. This is a critical step, as it allows for\nVenezuelans to access national health services,\nincluding vaccination campaigns.\n\n**\u25a0** In September 2020, **Thailand** included more\nthan 3,000 undocumented stateless students in\nits national healthcare system by granting them\nan ID number in the National Healthcare Fund for\nPersons with Legal Status Problems.\n\n\n\n6 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to vaccines\n\n#### **Recommendations**\n\n\n**Devise national COVID-19 vaccination plans based on public health consider-**\n**ations and in line with human rights standards,** ensuring accessibility, equitability,\nnon-discrimination and inclusion of all persons resident on the territory to the greatest extent possible. Prioritization plans should give consideration to factors that may\nheighten the risk of getting COVID-19 among stateless populations as well as their\nvulnerability to more serious outcomes.\n\n\n**Identify barriers that stateless populations may face** in accessing vaccination and\ndesign targeted programs to ensure meaningful and practical access.\n\n\n**Exempt stateless persons from requirements of legal status and identity docu-**\n**mentation** and create an alternative system for undocumented persons to register\nfor and receive vaccination.\n\n\n**Establish criteria to determine priority vaccine recipients** transparently and ensure that prioritization plans are widely communicated to the population.\n\n\n**Ensure messaging on COVID-19 vaccines in languages that all populations resi-**\n**dent on the territory can understand.** Diverse means of communication may need\nto be employed in order to reach all people resident on the territory.\n\n\n**Create a firewall between vaccination and immigration services,** allowing stateless persons, persons at risk of statelessness and others to access services without\nfear that their information will be shared with immigration authorities. Governments\nshould issue clear assurances to all groups that they will not face arrest or other\nlegal repercussions when coming forward for vaccination.\n\n\n**Engage a wide range of stakeholders,** including grassroots organizations and\nstateless persons, **in identification, outreach and vaccine distribution** to alleviate\nmistrust towards authorities and enhance willingness to get vaccinated.\n\n\n**Ensure that prioritization plans are clear, leaving no room for misinterpretation**\n**or discriminatory practices** by local authorities responsible for implementing the\nplans. Monitoring of vaccine distribution can further reduce the risks of improper\nexclusion of certain groups.\n\n\n**Establish plans for equitable inclusion of all people resident on the territory in**\n**vaccine roll-out strategies before introducing \u201cvaccine passport\u201d schemes.**\n\n\n7 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to civil documentation\n\n## **Access to civil documentation**\n\n### **_Where civil documentation is not issued or lapses,_** **_the risks are likely to be highest for minority group_** **_members._**\n\n\n\nIn a number of countries where civil registration services were not designated as vital services, birth registration services completely ceased for the majority\nof the pandemic or for significant time periods. In other countries, birth registration offices were still operational, although with reduced staffing and opening\nhours. There are also reports that specific civil registration services to target hard-to-reach areas, such\nas mobile activities, were sometimes suspended. In\nmany of these countries, significant backlogs have\nbeen reported, which in some cases come on top of\nexisting birth registration backlogs. Where civil documentation is not issued or lapses, the risks are likely\nto be highest for minority group members to (re)establish their nationality in the absence of documentation proving place of birth and descent.\n\n\n**The risk of statelessness due to non-**\n**registration of births**\n\n\nBirth certificates are a key form of proof to establish\neligibility for a nationality in that the document provides key information, such as place of birth and parentage, needed to assert a child\u2019s right to a nationality. While lack of birth registration on its own does not\nrender a person stateless, it can create a risk of statelessness if a person cannot establish entitlement to\n\n\n\nnationality. As noted above, some population groups\nare at particular risk. These include minority groups,\nnomadic and border populations, refugees, internally displaced persons, migrants and unaccompanied\nor separated children. To ensure universal access to\nbirth registration, UNHCR advocates for obstacles to\nbirth registration to be tackled and specific initiatives\nto be undertaken to reach those at risk of not getting\nbirths registered.\n\n\n**Good practices**\n\n\nIn many countries birth registration services were\nconsidered as \u2018vital services\u2019 and were continued\nduring the pandemic as a result, albeit with certain\nmeasures in place to minimize the risk of spreading\nthe virus. Some notable examples are listed below.\n\n\nA number of countries adopted alternative institutional practices to be able to continue to offer civil registration services:\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Chile**, emergency offices were opened in the\ncapital district to guarantee the provision of civil\nregistration services. Additional personnel were\ntrained to perform civil registration and virtual\nservices were expanded.\n\n\n\n8 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to civil documentation\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Honduras**, the \u2018Smart Opening Plan\u2019 was adopted to resume the registration of vital events. It\nsets out a number of criteria for the reopening\nof offices. Home visits were also scheduled for\nthose who could not go to an office.\n\n\nA number of countries used the pandemic as an opportunity to digitize civil registration services:\n\n\n**\u25a0** **Costa Rica** developed a platform which made\nit possible for people to obtain birth, death and\nmarriage certificates online.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Panama**, a new online platform \u2018Tribunal\nContigo\u2019 was rolled out for people to access civil\nregistration services digitally to mitigate the suspension of in-person services.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Kazakhstan**, birth registration and applications\nfor other civil registration and documentation\nmay now be submitted online and certificates\ncan be picked up at the civil registry office. Several extensions were given for all residents whose\ndocuments expired during lockdown to renew\nthem while not incurring a penalty.\n\n\nCivil registration deadlines were relaxed or suspended for the duration of the pandemic and late birth registration fees lifted in some countries:\n\n\n\n\n**\u25a0** In **Jordan**, the Government passed Defense\norder No. 5 suspending deadlines for birth registration. This allowed for the late birth registration\nof children whose births could not be registered\nduring the lockdown. Late birth registration fees\nwere also waived.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Morocco**, the 30-day administrative registration deadline to register births was suspended\nfor the duration of the pandemic.\n\n**\u25a0** In **Lebanon**, Parliament suspended the oneyear birth registration deadline from 18 October\n2019 until 31 December 2020, which was further\nextended until 31 March 2021. Accordingly, births that passed the one-year mark in this period\ncould still be registered administratively.\n\n**\u25a0** In **South Africa**, although the Department of\nHome Affairs suspended birth registration at\nthe beginning of the lockdown, children born in\nthis period do not have to undergo the late birth registration procedure which involves more\nstringent requirements, including higher costs.\n\n**\u25a0** In the **Kyrgyz Republic**, civil registry offices were\nclosed in some locations during the state of\nemergency; no fines were applied for late birth\nregistration or overdue renewal of residency\ndocuments for foreign citizens and stateless persons affected by these closures.\n\n\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Access to civil documentation\n\n#### **Recommendations**\n\n\nIn line with recommendations issued in May 2020, [14] UNHCR urges governments to undertake\nthe following actions:\n\n\n**Birth and death registration services should be considered an \u2018essential service\u2019**\nand should continue to operate, with temporary modifications in operational arrangements as necessary and appropriate.\n\n\n**Authorities are encouraged to digitize civil registration services to the extent that**\n**this transition does not disadvantage those without access to internet.** The pandemic offers an opportunity to improve the technological infrastructure of civil registration services to enhance accessibility even after the crisis.\n\n\n**Authorities are encouraged to implement procedures for late birth registration,**\n**extend existing deadlines, and suspend penalties and fees.** These provisions\nshould continue for a period after COVID-19 restrictions have been lifted in order for\nbacklogs to be rapidly cleared. Additional evidentiary requirements in case of late\nbirth registration should be avoided.\n\n\n**The validity of nationality and residency documentation should be extended for**\n**the duration of the suspension of services.** Authorities are also encouraged to\nextend the validity of these documents for a reasonable period of time after registration services have restarted to allow persons to renew their documents before\nthey become invalid.\n\n\nIn addition, authorities are encouraged to develop and implement plans to efficiently deal with\nbacklogs. To this end, authorities are encouraged to consider hiring staffing on a temporary\nbasis and redirecting funds to this area.\n\n\n10 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**Endnotes**\n\n\n1 See for example: European Network on Statelessness,\n[Situation assessment of statelessness, health, and](https://www.statelessness.eu/sites/default/files/2021-04/ENS_Health_Situation_Assessment_Europe.pdf)\n[COVID-19 in Europe, April 2021;](https://www.statelessness.eu/sites/default/files/2021-04/ENS_Health_Situation_Assessment_Europe.pdf) [Right to Protection, Access](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/access_of_stateless_persons_to_medical_care_during_the_covid-19_eng.pdf)\n[of Stateless Persons to Medical Care during COVID-19](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/access_of_stateless_persons_to_medical_care_during_the_covid-19_eng.pdf)\n[and Assessment of the Economic and Social Impact of the](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/access_of_stateless_persons_to_medical_care_during_the_covid-19_eng.pdf)\n[Lockdown Measures, May 2020.](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/access_of_stateless_persons_to_medical_care_during_the_covid-19_eng.pdf)\n\n2 [UNHCR, The Impact of COVID-19 on Stateless Populations:](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5eb2a72f4.html)\n[Policy Recommendations and Good Practices, May 2020.](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5eb2a72f4.html)\n\n3 [UNHCR also issued a joint statement with OHCHR, IOM](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2020/3/5e836f164/rights-health-refugees-migrants-stateless-must-protected-covid-19-response.html)\nand the WHO calling attention to the particular vulnerability\nof stateless persons.\n\n4 [Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford, Our World in](https://bit.ly/3dLcLvH)\n[Data [accessed on 26 May].](https://bit.ly/3dLcLvH)\n\n5 The COVAX Facility is an initiative of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), Gavi, the Vaccine\nAlliance and the World Health Organization and aims at\nensuring equal access to vaccines for all participating countries, regardless of income levels.\n\n6 [Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, COVAX Vaccine Roll-Out [ac-](https://www.gavi.org/covax-vaccine-roll-out)\ncessed on 1 June].\n\n7 [Inter Agency Standing Committee, Frequently Asked](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/emergency-directors-group/frequently-asked-questions-covax-humanitarian-buffer)\n[Questions: The COVAX Humanitarian Buffer [accessed on](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/emergency-directors-group/frequently-asked-questions-covax-humanitarian-buffer)\n21 April].\n\n8 [GAVI, \u2018The COVAX Humanitarian Buffer Explained\u2019, 30](https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/covax-humanitarian-buffer-explained)\nMarch 2021.\n\n9 [UNHCR, \u201cThis Is Our Home\u201d Stateless Minorities and Their](https://www.refworld.org/docid/59e4a6534.html)\n[Search for Citizenship, November 2017.](https://www.refworld.org/docid/59e4a6534.html)\n\n[10 UNHCR, \u201cUNHCR calls for equitable access to COVID-19](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2021/4/606d56564/unhcr-calls-equitable-access-covid-19-vaccines-refugees.html)\n\n[vaccines for refugees\u201d, 7 April 2021.](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2021/4/606d56564/unhcr-calls-equitable-access-covid-19-vaccines-refugees.html)\n\n11 Most notably, the International Covenant on Economic,\nSocial and Cultural Rights, Article 12(1) establishes that \u2018The\nStates Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right\nof everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable\nstandard of physical and mental health\u2019, and that (2) \u2018The\nsteps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include\nthose necessary for: (c) The Prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases.\nFurthermore, Article 25(i) of the Universal Declaration of\nHuman Rights establishes that \u2018\u2018Everyone has the right to a\nstandard of living adequate for the health and well-being of\nhimself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing\nand medical care and necessary social services, and the\nright to security in the event of unemployment, sickness,\ndisability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in\ncircumstances beyond his control\u2019.\n\n[12 According to the World Bank Group\u2019s 2018 #ID4D Global](https://id4d.worldbank.org/global-dataset)\n\n[Dataset, an estimated one billion people around the globe](https://id4d.worldbank.org/global-dataset)\nface challenges in proving who they are.\n\n[13 UNHCR, \u201cUNHCR commends Central Asia for providing](https://www.unhcr.org/centralasia/en/14091-unhcr-commends-central-asia-for-providing-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-stateless-persons-with-access-to-covid-vaccination.html)\n\n[asylum seekers, refugees, and stateless persons with](https://www.unhcr.org/centralasia/en/14091-unhcr-commends-central-asia-for-providing-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-stateless-persons-with-access-to-covid-vaccination.html)\n[access to COVID vaccination\u201d, 14 May 2021](https://www.unhcr.org/centralasia/en/14091-unhcr-commends-central-asia-for-providing-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-stateless-persons-with-access-to-covid-vaccination.html)\n\n[14 UNHCR, The Impact of COVID-19 on Stateless Populations:](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5eb2a72f4.html)\n\n[Policy Recommendations and Good Practices, May 2020.](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5eb2a72f4.html)\n\n\n11 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "ID4D Global",
-          "confidence": 0.5303452014923096,
-          "start": 539,
-          "end": 541
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "World Bank Group",
-          "confidence": 0.7780938744544983,
-          "start": 532,
-          "end": 535
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.9635902047157288,
-          "start": 537,
-          "end": 538
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2018",
-          "confidence": 0.5098960399627686,
-          "start": 537,
-          "end": 538
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Cover Photo: Nairobi, Kenya: Nosizi a formerly stateless member of\nthe Shona community is now a citizen and studies economics at the\n\nUniversity of Nairobi. \u00a9UNHCR/ Anthony Karumba\n\n\n12 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON STATELESS POPULATIONS\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/b6460f8f-d52b-3589-b27f-6df6471c3e78/60b8d6d84.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_141/raw/doc_141_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,203 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **Acronyms and abbreviations**\n\nANC Antenatal Care\n\n\nANM Anaemia\n\n\nBSC Balanced Score Card\n\n\nCHW Community Health Workers\n\n\nGAM Global Acute Malnutrition\n\n\nGCR Global Compact on Refugees\n\n\nHFUR Health Facility Utilisation Rate\n\n\nHIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus\n\n\nILO International Labour Organization\n\n\nIPT Interpersonal Therapy\n\n\niRHIS Integrated Refugee Health Information System\n\n\nIYCF Infant and young child feeding\n\n\nMAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition\n\n\nMC Measles Coverage\n\n\nmhGAP Mental Health Gap Action Programme\n\n\nMHPSS Mental Health and Psychosocial Support\n\n\nMoH Ministry of Health\n\n\nNCDs Noncommunicable diseases\n\n\nPEP Post-Exposure Prophylaxis\n\n\nPLHIV People Living with HIV\n\n\nPLW Pregnant and Lactating Women\n\n\nPMTCT Prevention of Mother-to-child Transmission\n\n\nPNC Post Natal Care\n\n\nSAM Severe Acute Malnutrition\n\n\nSC Stabilization Centre\n\n\nSBA Skilled Birth Attendance\n\n\nSDG Sustainable Development Goal\n\n\nTB Tuberculosis\n\n\nU5MR Under 5 Mortality Rate\n\n\nWHO World Health Organization\n\n\n### **Table of Contents**\n\n**1. Public Health** **7**\n\n\n**2. Sexual and reproductive health & HIV** **19**\n\n\n**3. Nutrition** **25**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **OVERVIEW**\n\n\n\nInformation System\n\n\nNumber of sites/\nfacilities using iRHIS\n\n\n- countries with health programmes AND expenditure > 50,000 USD in the year AND >5,000 refugees/or\npeople in refugee-like situations or Low/ Middle Income Countries with > 150,000 refugees / asylum seekers\n\n\n\nBurkina Faso\nBurundi\nChina\nCongo\nDjibouti\nEgypt\nIran\nColombia\nGhana\nIndia\nIndonesia\nLebanon\nLiberia\nLibya\n\n\n\nMauritania\nCentral African Republic\nMorocco\nTurkey\nPeru\nNepal\nNiger\nNigeria\nPakistan\nRussian Federation#\nSomalia\nZimbabwe\nSouth Africa\nCosta Rica\n\n\n## **159**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **1. Public Health**\n\nUNHCR aims to ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing of its persons\nof concern, enabling them to access safe, effective, equitable and affordable\nhealth care services. UNHCR supported access to comprehensive primary\nhealth care services as well as referral to secondary and tertiary care for\nrefugees in 50 countries hosting 16.5 million refugees. Primary care included\npreventive, promotive and curative care including vaccination, access to clinical\nconsultations and medications, sexual and reproductive health and HIV services,\nmental health care, and nutrition care.\n\n\nUNHCR works with nearly 150 NGOs and other partners in collaboration with\nand support to national health systems.\n\n\nAt the end of 2020, UNHCR had 153 public health, reproductive health, MHPSS\n(Mental Health and Psychosocial Support) and nutrition personnel globally with\n88% percent working at country level.\n\n\nThe integrated Refugee Health Information System (iRHIS) is used by UNHCR\nand partners in 19 countries and 159 refugee hosting sites. Health information\nfor refugees in other countries was collected through national health systems\nwhich mostly do not allow for disaggregated data. Enhancements were made\nto the system and modules integrated to facilitate COVID-19 case reporting\namongst PoC.\n\n\nA significant focus of 2020 was preparedness and response to the global\nCOVID-19 pandemic. UNHCR worked with national authorities to include\nrefugees and other persons of concern in national response plans; facilitate\naccess to information on prevention as well as access to testing and clinical\ncare. In many refugee hosting countries this included support to national health\nsystems, increasing testing capacity through procurement of tests and support\nto laboratories, establishment of isolation facilities in government or camp health\nfacilities, training of staff, procurement of essential medicines and supplies,\nincluding personal protective equipment (PPE) and oxygen concentrators and\nengagement with and communicating with communities. Community health\nworkers played a critical role in many settings by providing vital information to\ncommunities as well as assisting in detection of cases, referrals, follow-up and\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "integrated Refugee Health Information System",
-          "confidence": 0.984764814376831,
-          "start": 162,
-          "end": 167
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "iRHIS",
-          "confidence": 0.9900845289230347,
-          "start": 168,
-          "end": 169
-        },
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.5031020641326904,
-          "start": 106,
-          "end": 107
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2020",
-          "confidence": 0.6317806839942932,
-          "start": 129,
-          "end": 130
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugees",
-          "confidence": 0.839135468006134,
-          "start": 60,
-          "end": 61
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "#### **KEY INDICATORS**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGlobally the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on access to and utilisation of\nhealth services. At the onset of the pandemic with the first cases detected in\nrespective countries, there was generally a reduction in outpatient consultations\nassociated with fear of getting infected at facilities, the impact of lockdowns and\nreduction in movements, and as the health workforce was diverted to provide\nCOVID-19 care.\n\n\nAdaptations were made to ensure continuity of safe access to essential\nservices, particularly safe deliveries, as well as adaptations to ensure continuity\nfor those with chronic care needs such as TB and HIV, including dispensing 2-3\nmonths of medicines supply and remote follow-up for stable patients.\n\n\nAs lockdowns and restrictions were lifted, access and utilisation of health\nservices increased. Overall, the health facility utilisation rate remained within\nacceptable ranges over 2020 compared to 2019, despite periodic decreases in\nutilisation.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|INDICATOR<br>Total consultations<br>in countries using<br>iRHIS|2020<br>7,562,609|2019<br>7,167,197|STANDARD|\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n||Total Population<br>of Concern in<br>Countries using<br>iRHIS|4,669,953|4,741,914||\n||Health Facility<br>Utilisation Rate|1,6 consultation per<br>person per year|1,5|UNHCR/SPHERE<br>standard 1-4|\n||Crude mortality rate|0,11 deaths per 1,000<br>per month|0,12|<0.75 deaths per<br>1,000 per month|\n||U5 Mortality Rate|0,19 deaths per<br>1,000 population<br>under 5 per month|0,3|<1.5 deaths per<br>1,000 per month|\n||Skilled birth<br>attendance rate|92%|90.7%|Target >90%|\n\n\n\n8 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### COVID-19 Morbidity and Mortality\n\nThere were 41,401 cases of COVID-19 amongst persons of concern reported\nto UNHCR in 2020 and 401 deaths, a case fatality rate of 0.97%. Although this\nis similar to case fatality rates reported elsewhere it is recognized that there is\nsignificant under-detection and under-reporting of both cases and deaths.\n\n\n\n0.45\n\n0.40\n\n0.35\n\n0.30\n\n0.25\n\n0.20\n\n0.15\n\n0.10\n\n0.05\n\n\n\n**UNDER FIVE MORTALITY RATE**\n\n\n0.4\n\n\n0.3 0.3\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n0.00\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|\n|---|---|---|\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n\n2017\n\n###### Morbidity and Mortality\n\n\n\n2018 2019 2020\n\n\n\nThe average crude mortality rate was 0.11 deaths per 1,000 total population per\nmonth, similar to that reported in 2019 (0.13 deaths/1,000 population).\n\n\nThe under-5 mortality rate was an average of 0.19 deaths per 1000 under five\npopulation per month, across 159 sites in 19 countries compared to a rate of 0.3\nin 2019. The trend shows a progressive reduction over time.\n\n\nThe most common causes of morbidity were malaria (20%), upper respiratory\ntract infections (19%), and lower respiratory tract infections (6%), similar to 2019.\nNCD and mental health consultations accounted for 4% ( 333,011 ) and 2%\n(142,971 ) of outpatient consultations respectively.\n\n\n\nWith the announcement of several promising COVID-19 vaccines in the latter\npart of 2020, focused advocacy efforts were made at country, regional and\nglobal levels to ensure refugees and other persons of concern were included\nin national plans for roll-out. UNHCR participated in an Interagency Working\nGroup to develop the principles and design of the Covax Humanitarian Bufferan allocation of doses within the Covax facility as a last resort mechanism for\nhumanitarian affected populations who may have been excluded from national\nvaccine rollout.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n10 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "programming a priority was to ensure continuous care for persons with\nmoderate to severe mental health conditions. They should continue to have\naccess to clinical and other services, through primary health care facilities\nwith trained and supervised health workers, or through dedicated mental\nhealth programmes. Some services could be delivered through remote\nsupport, but in many cases, direct person-to-person support could continue\nin safe ways by more extensive use of community-based workers and by\nadapting facility-based care to prevent infections. Data from the iRHIS\ndemonstrate that while the absolute number of consultations decreased,\nthe percentage of primary care consultations dedicated to mental health\nremained stable at around 2%.\n\n\n\n\n###### Mental Health\n\n[The COVID-19 pandemic increased the levels of psychological distress](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2020/5/5ebcfd784/unhcr-urges-prioritization-mental-health-support-coronavirus-response.html)\n[among refugees, while delivery of and access to services was much more](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2020/5/5ebcfd784/unhcr-urges-prioritization-mental-health-support-coronavirus-response.html)\ncomplicated. During periods of movement restrictions and lockdowns,\nactivities that were less essential had to be scaled down or suspended\nwhile new interventions and innovative ways of service delivery had to\nbe developed. UNHCR co- chaired the inter-agency working group that\n[produced IASC-endorsed guidelines for continuation and adaptation of](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/iasc-guidance-operational-considerations-multisectoral-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support)\n[MHPSS services during the pandemic. For example, messages about coping](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/iasc-guidance-operational-considerations-multisectoral-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support)\n[with distress were distributed through community volunteers and social](https://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2020/7/5f04725b4/refugees-deliver-mental-health-services-locked-camps-iraq.html)\nmedia. Many first responders were trained in Psychological First Aid and\n[other basic psychosocial skills. In some countries such as Greece, Lebanon](https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/iasc-reference-group-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-emergency-settings/iasc-guidance-basic-psychosocial-skills-guide-covid-19-responders)\nand Uganda, psychological support to refugees was provided through\nhelplines. Telephone and internet were increasingly used as modalities\n[to provide psychotherapy for refugees with mental health issues such as](https://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2020/5/5ebc7f7f4/venezuelan-counsellors-offer-fellow-refugees-psychological-first-aid.html)\ndepression, anxiety, post traumatic stress, and bereavement. Within MHPSS\n\n\n\n\n\n12 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "###### Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs)\n\nNon-communicable diseases are recognized as an increasing cause of morbidity\nand mortality in humanitarian settings. Capacity strengthening focused on\nintegration of NCD care into primary health care and adaptations to COVID-19.\nUNHCR continued to convene the informal interagency working group on\nNCDs in emergencies and along with IRC published operational guidance\non [Integrating Non-communicable Disease Care in Humanitarian Settings in](https://www.unhcr.org/5fcfb9744)\ncollaboration with the group.\n\n\nIn light of COVID-19 restrictions support was provided to countries on continuity\nof NCD services including through webinars, provision of guidance on NCDs\nand COVID-19 and continuity of services and through the community of practice.\nAdaptations were made to ensure continuity of care for persons living with\nNCDs including dispensing medicines for 2-3 months for stable patients and\nremote follow-up where possible.\n\n\n###### Working with national health systems\n\n**Social health protection** and universal health coverage (UHC) improve\nhealth status and contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in\nparticular targets under SDGs 1, 3 and 8 to reduce mortality and morbidity at all\nages, reduce poverty, hunger and malnutrition and improve livelihoods. Since\n2014, the ILO and UNHCR have been collaborating on the extension of social\nhealth protection to refugees. [Experiences, learnings and practical tools were](https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---ddg_p/documents/publication/wcms_760638.pdf)\npublished in 2020 and collaboration continued on assessing the prospects\nfor inclusion of refugees in national social health protection schemes in a\nnumber of countries in the Middle East and East and Horn of Africa as part of\nthe [Partnership for improving prospects for forcibly displaced persons and host](https://www.ilo.org/global/programmes-and-projects/prospects/lang--en/index.htm)\n[communities (PROSPECTS)](https://www.ilo.org/global/programmes-and-projects/prospects/lang--en/index.htm)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDepending on the context and the location of refugees there may be a need\nfor expanded modalities to finance access to health care. UNHCR continued\nto support **cash assistance** to facilitate heath service access in selected\ncountries including Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Mexico and other countries in Latin\nAmerica. [The Role of Cash Assistance in Financing Access to Health Care in](https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/5fc0b3fb4)\n[Refugee Settings and other Persons of Concern to UNHCR](https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/5fc0b3fb4) was published in\n2020 providing an overview of health financing mechanisms and the specific\nrole cash assistance can play in financing access to health services in refugee\nsettings and for other PoC to UNHCR.\n\n\nIn line with the Global Compact on Refugees UNHCR continued to work with\nministries of health to promote **greater inclusion** of refugees and other POCs\ninto national health policies, plans, funding proposals and services. UNHCR is\ntracking this in 48 countries globally with the [Public Health Inclusion Dashboard](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMWQ0OGM4YWEtNzYxZS00MTVlLTk4ZTItMjk4YzU5NTkwYjhhIiwidCI6ImU1YzM3OTgxLTY2NjQtNDEzNC04YTBjLTY1NDNkMmFmODBiZSIsImMiOjh9&pageName=ReportSection)\nThe importance of this was demonstrated with the COVID-19 response with the\nmajority of refugee hosting countries adopting inclusive approaches.\n\n\n**Pharmacy Management Capacity building**\n\n\nAccess to affordable, quality-assured essential medicines reduces the financial\nburden of health care, reduces pain and suffering, shortens illness duration, and\n\n\n\n14 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "averts preventable disabilities and deaths. Access to essential medicines is also\nnecessary to achieve UHC and the SDGs. Medicines are potentially high-cost\nitems that are easily diverted or misused or can fail to meet quality standards\nwithout appropriate systems in place. To strengthen medicines management\nin UNHCR and partner facilities, UNHCR has been providing in-country and\nremote technical support, partnering with QUAMED, a specialist NGO working\non quality assurance system assessments, to do local pharmaceutical market\nassessments, developing pharmacy management monitoring tools and\nundertaking capacity building. Tools developed included standard operating\nprocedures on medicine management at UNHCR, and monitoring checklists for\npharmacies in health facilities and central medical stores.\n\n\n**Medicines and Medical Supplies Management for COVID-19 response**\n\n\nIn response to COVID-19, a list of essential medicines and medical supplies for\nthe prevention, diagnosis and case management was updated. The operating\nenvironment was challenging during the first phase of the pandemic due to\nsupply chain and transport limitations. Quality assurance was provided for\nproducts procured including for any local procurement in case international\nprocurement was not possible. Some limited stockpiles of PPE were kept\nfor mobilization in case of urgent country needs. In addition, forecasting and\nordering was done for regular medical services to avoid stock outs and ensure\ncontinuity of services.\n\n\n\n1 Uddin, A., & Sumi, H. (2019). The story of a Rohingya refugee: becoming a community psychosocial volunteer.\n\nIntervention, 17(2), 296.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n16 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **2. SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE** **HEALTH & HIV**\n\nAccess to integrated comprehensive sexual and reproductive health (SRH)\nservices remains a priority for UNHCR to enhance the wellbeing of women,\nmen, girls and boys. In 2020, access to health services was impacted globally\nby COVID-19. SRH service provision, as a critical service area, continued\nuninterrupted throughout the year while adjustments were made to facilitate\nsafe service provision. Nevertheless, several country operations saw a\ntemporary decline in the uptake of preventive services such as antenatal care.\nIntensive community engagement by refugee volunteers and health staff\ncontributed to building confidence in health services, leading to an overall\nincrease in the uptake of SRH services when compared to 2019.\n\n\n##### **112,130 92%**\n\nNumber of live births\n\n\n##### **112,130**\n\n\n##### **2020 112,130 92%**\n\nNumber of live births Percentage of deliveries\n##### 19 countries assisted by SBA\n\n\n\nIn 2020, 112,119 **live births** were reported from 159 refugee settlements in 19\ncountries, a similar level to 2019 (108,545 live births). The overall skilled birth\nattendance remained at similar levels (92.0% in 2020). Disparities remain\nbetween countries, with only 12 countries (63% of countries) achieving the\nminimum standard of more than 90% skilled birth attendance.\n\n\nThe overall uptake of antenatal care (ANC) services increased by 6 percent\nin comparison to 2019, a total of 489,452 consultations were provided in\ncomparison to 462,694 consultations in 2019. Similarly, the percentage of\nwomen who accessed at least four ANC visits increased from 69.6% in 2019\nto 73.1% in 2020, with three countries reaching a coverage of more than 90%.\nNearly three quarters of women (72.4%) attended the recommended three PNC\nvisits within 6 weeks compared to 64.1% in 2019.\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "adapting delivery mechanisms for essential HIV services through community\nnetworks to prevent treatment disruption and ensure continued access to\ncondoms and lubricants.\n\n\nIn 2020 UNHCR supported HIV counselling and testing to more than 500,000\npeople. In addition over 150,000 pregnant women were tested for HIV and\nat least 14,526 persons were on antiretroviral treatment. HIV testing and\ncare services supported by UNHCR are accessible to refugees and host\ncommunities alike. For example in Uganda, more than 224,300 people were\nprovided with HIV counselling and testing, of which 37% were host community\nmembers. Operations focused on increasing the capacity of community health\nworkers to address key priorities including training in outreach for TB/HIV,\nimproving services for adolescents and young people, improving services for\nkey populations including sex workers, and improving retention in care. Key\npartners in both HIV and TB related activities included UNAIDS, the Global Fund\nfor HIV, TB and Malaria and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development.\n\n\nUNHCR supports services for the **clinical management of rape** and other forms\nof sexual violence. This includes the provision of post-exposure prophylaxis,\nemergency contraception and prophylaxis for sexually transmitted infections for\nsurvivors; psychosocial support and mental health services; and referral for legal\nand protection services as well as for specialised care.\n\n\nWHO, UNFPA and UNHCR released [updated guidance](https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331535/9789240001411-eng.pdf?ua=1) on the **clinical**\n**management of rape and intimate partner violence in 2019** . In 2020, the\nthree agencies continued collaboration in developing and rolling out capacity\nbuilding and sensitization on community awareness, a proactive approach to\nthe identification of rape survivors; comprehensive and timely clinical care of\nsurvivors and linkages with relevant services, particularly protection.\n\n\n**RAPE SURVIVORS WHO SOUGHT CARE**\n\n**WITHIN 72H PROVIDED WITH PEP**\n\n\n\n\n\n**Neonatal deaths** represent a significant proportion of deaths among children under\nthe age of five in UNHCR operations and maternal mortality continues to raise\nconcerns in most of the settings where UNHCR supports services. **Maternal deaths**\n**are reported and reviewed** in refugee operations and the overall mortality reporting\nsystem has been strengthened at facility and community level. Nonetheless, as in\nmany countries it is recognised that neonatal and maternal deaths are underreported\nin refugee settings. A detailed analysis of 83 maternal death reviews in refugee\ncamps in East and Horn of Africa revealed gaps in systematic, standardised reporting.\nIn response UNHCR updated the [Maternal Death Review Guidance. Capacity](https://www.unhcr.org/604f75224)\nstrengthening will continue in order to improve timeliness and quality of maternal\ndeath reviews and ultimately improve services. A three-year project supported by the\nBill and Melinda Gates Foundation which focuses on low-cost high-impact activities to\nreduce maternal and neonatal deaths is being implemented in Cameroon, Chad and\nNiger and learnings are shared with operations globally.\n\n\nCommunity engagement efforts were further strengthened in 2020 to contribute\nto trust building in health systems during COVID-19 and to enhance uptake of\nskilled birth attendance, antenatal and postnatal care. Community Health Workers\n(CHWs) engaged with women and men as well as community leaders to improve\nawareness, strengthen linkages between the community and health facilities\nand enhance health service utilisation. In several countries former traditional\nbirth attendants are engaged as agents of change and counsel and accompany\nwomen to health facilities for social support during labour.\n\n\nDuring 2020, UNHCR continued protection related activities relating to HIV\nglobally and supported specific HIV-related activities in more than 50 countries,\nincluding the focus on continuity of HIV services during the COVID-19 pandemic.\nThis included activities to protect refugees from exposure to COVID-19\n(the provision of multi-month refills of ART for people living with HIV); and\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n20 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 21\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "22 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 23\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "### **3. NUTRITION**\n\n**Community Management of Acute Malnutrition (CMAM) in 2020**\n\n\n##### **2020 79,971**\n\n\n##### **182,151**\n\nwith Moderate Acute\nMalnutrition (MAM) admitted\ninto treatment programmes [[[5].]](https://euc-word-edit.officeapps.live.com/we/wordeditorframe.aspx?ui=en-us&rs=en-us&wopisrc=https%3A%2F%2Funhcr365.sharepoint.com%2Fteams%2Fdrs-ph%2F_vti_bin%2Fwopi.ashx%2Ffiles%2F4c4ec5e598ce4ae4a731e274782ee7ea&wdenableroaming=1&mscc=1&hid=-5281&uiembed=1&uih=teams&hhdr=1&dchat=1&sc=%7B%22pmo%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fteams.microsoft.com%22%2C%22pmshare%22%3Atrue%2C%22surl%22%3A%22%22%2C%22curl%22%3A%22%22%2C%22vurl%22%3A%22%22%2C%22eurl%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fteams.microsoft.com%2Ffiles%2Fapps%2Fcom.microsoft.teams.files%2Ffiles%2F2801001684%2Fopen%3Fagent%3Dpostmessage%26objectUrl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Funhcr365.sharepoint.com%252Fteams%252Fdrs-ph%252FShared%2520Documents%252FGeneral%252FReports%252FAnnual%2520PHS%2520Reports%252F2020%252FWORKING%2520DRAFT%2520Annual%2520PH%2520Global%2520Review_2020_Text%2520160221.docx%26fileId%3D4c4ec5e5-98ce-4ae4-a731-e274782ee7ea%26fileType%3Ddocx%26ctx%3Dsearch%26scenarioId%3D5281%26locale%3Den-us%26theme%3Ddefault%26version%3D21021008600%26setting%3Dring.id%3Ageneral%26setting%3DcreatedTime%3A1618468932966%22%7D&wdorigin=TEAMS-ELECTRON.teams.search&wdhostclicktime=1618468932846&jsapi=1&jsapiver=v1&newsession=1&corrid=b96c10a4-9248-4ca6-9ed7-0e9f59f5265a&usid=b96c10a4-9248-4ca6-9ed7-0e9f59f5265a&sftc=1&sams=1&accloop=1&sdr=6&scnd=1&hbcv=1&htv=1&hodflp=1&instantedit=1&wopicomplete=1&wdredirectionreason=Unified_SingleFlush&rct=Medium&ctp=LeastProtected#_ftn5)\n\n\n##### 32 countries\n\n\n\nchildren 6-59 months with Severe\nAcute Malnutrition (SAM) admitted\ninto treatment programmes\n\n\n\nPromotion and advocacy for adequate nutrition throughout the life cycle and\neliminating all forms of malnutrition remained integral to UNHCR\u2019s nutrition\nprogramming. Most refugee operations were confronted with persistent multiple\nburdens of malnutrition as highlighted by the most recent nutrition surveys\nfrom 2019[1] in 77 refugee sites across 13 countries. Of the 77 sites (61%) met\nthe GAM standards of < 10%, (26%) had a GAM prevalence 10-15% indicating a\nserious situation and the rest (13%) were above the emergency threshold of \u2265\n15% indicating a critical situation. Stunting amongst children aged 6 -59 months\nremained of concern. Only (12%) of the sites had an acceptable level of (<10%), and\n12% a medium level of stunting, 27% of the sites recorded high levels and the rest\n(49%) had stunting prevalence above the critical level of \u226530%. Anaemia in children\n6 - 59 months old \u2013 a measure of iron deficiency and general micronutrient status\n\n                                                                   - only met the standard of <20% in (6%) of the sites, 25% of the sites had medium\nlevel anaemia levels and the rest (68%) had critical level of \u2265 40%.\n\n\nGAM* STUNTING*\n\n\n77 sites GAM children 6-59 months 77 sites Stunting children 6-59 months\n\n61% met GAM standard of less than 10% 12% were <10% = acceptable\n\n26% had GAM of 10-15%  = serious 12% medium level of stunting\n\n13% were above 15% = critical 27% high levels of stunting\n\n49% critical levels of stunting\n\n*2019 data\n\n\nANAEMIA*\n\n77 sites Children 6-59 months\n\n6% met standard\n\n25% medium levels of anaemia\n\n68% critical levels\n\n\nThe onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 resulted in mobility restrictions in\nmost operations. As a result, in collaboration with other key partners including\nWFP and UNICEF, the delivery of nutrition programs was reviewed to ensure\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Infection prevention and control and improved hygiene practices were\nintegrated in nutrition service delivery, including Community Management of\nAcute Malnutrition (CMAM), Infant and Young Child Feeding (IYCF) support and\npromotion and blanket supplementary feeding.[2] In addition, adaptations were\nmade in the delivery of nutrition services to reduce gatherings at clinics and\nfrequency of face-to-face consultations.\n\n\nTo ensure continuity of the treatment of acute malnutrition under the CMAM\nprogram the following measures were adopted:\n\n\n\u22b2 The frequency of house-to-house community health workers screening\n\nincreased (9 countries 51 operations)[3] to maintain community screening\nand case finding.\n\n\n\u22b2 Additional community avenues for malnutrition screening included the use\n\nof Mother to Mother Support Groups and the training and adoption of a\nfamily-MUAC approach (8 countries (44 operations)[4].\n\n\n\u22b2 MUAC tapes were disinfected after every use.\n\n\n\u22b2 At the facility level modified/simplified treatment protocols were used\n\nincluding reduced frequency of follow-up appointments and the number\nof children visiting the nutrition clinics at one time\n\n\n       - Outpatient Therapeutic feeding (from once a week to every two\nweeks) and\n\n\n       - Targeted supplementary feeding from biweekly to monthly.\n\n\n\u22b2 Treatment protocols were modified with most operations adopting the\n\nuse of MUAC-only admission and discharge criteria while some used a\ncombined severe and moderate acute malnutrition protocol with Ready to\nUse Therapeutic Food (RUTF) being used for both.\n\n\n\u22b2 Some operations used community health workers to deliver treatment\n\nof uncomplicated acute malnutrition using low literacy tools to facilitate\ntheir work.\n\n\nBlanket supplementary feeding programmes (BSFP) helped bridge the nutrition\ngap experienced by children, women, or other populations with additional\nnutritional needs including persons living with HIV and/or TB. BSFP remained\nessential to confront the increased risk of food insecurity and reduced access\nto acute malnutrition services caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Eight out of\nthe 13 surveyed countries[6] implemented BSFP covering different populations,\nfor example, persons living with TB and/or HIV ranging from children aged 6-23\nmonths to 6-59 months, pregnant and lactating women, and older people.\n\n\nTo allow continuation of BSFP service in the COVID-19 context:\n\n\n\u22b2 increased supplies were prepositioned,\n\n\n\u22b2 more distribution days were scheduled,\n\n\n\u22b2 two months of rations were provided instead of one.\n\n\nDistributions were thus less crowded and less frequent.\n\n\n\nOptimal IYCF promotes child survival, growth and development. IYCF continued\nto be strengthened in 2020. COVID-19 adapted IYCF information, education\nand communication was put in place. UNHCR, including in southern Chad,\nwestern Rwanda and South Sudan, explored innovative ways to deliver services\nto communities (remote IYCF counseling via radio or telephone and utilizing\npractical communication platforms (such as broadcasted text messages).\nSupport and counselling was provided to mothers with suspected or confirmed\nCOVID-19 on the recommended feeding practices and infection prevention\n(respiratory hygiene practices during breastfeeding, importance of exclusive\nbreastfeeding, and mental health support ). The implementation of the IYCF\nmultisectoral framework for action in the COVID-19 context was followed up\nand documentation of the delivery experiences done in Ethiopia, Uganda and\nBangladesh (three of the six countries where the framework has been rolled\nout). The Framework aims to optimise conditions for IYCF-sensitive interventions\nin refugee settings. Lessons from the review in the three countries resulted in an\nIYCF program COVID-19 adaptations brief.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n26 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review 27\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "**End notes**\n\n\n[1] 2019 SENS\n\n\n[2] UNHCR Operations\u2019 Adaptations of Nutrition and Food Security Programmes\nin the COVID-19 context report\n\n\n[3] Chad, DRC, Kenya, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda, Zambia\n\n\n[4] Algeria, Bangladesh, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda\n\n\n[5] HIS report (19 countries); GHRP report (additional 13 countries)\n\n\n[6] Bangladesh, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Niger, Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda\n\n\n28 2020 Annual Public Health Global Review\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees\nPublic Health Section\nDivision of Resilience and Solutions\nRue de Montbrillant 94 CH-1201\nGeneve Switzerland\n\n\nT: +41 22 739 8433 F: +41 22 739 7344\n[E-mail: hqphn@unhcr.org](mailto:hqphn@unhcr.org)\n\n\nwww.unhcr.org\n\n\nThe boundaries shown on the maps do not imply\nofficial endorsement or acceptance by the United\nNations.\n\n\nCover photo: \u00a9 UNHCR/Jerry de Mars\n\n\nUNHCR \u00a9 2021\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/02d0f699-fe5c-3ab0-8f9e-b7ba21c3eb83/60dc89e24.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_142/raw/doc_142_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,455 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "DEVELOPING\nCOUNTRIES HOSTED\n#### **85%**\n\n\n\nMILLION IN\nREFUGEES HOSTED ARE DISPLACED\n\n\n\nIN TURKEY\n\n\n\nIN\nARE DISPLACED\n\n\n\nRelative to their national populations, [5]\nthe island of Aruba hosted the largest\nnumber of Venezuelans displaced\nabroad (1 in 6) while Lebanon hosted\nthe largest number of refugees (1 in 8), [6]\nfollowed by Cura\u00e7ao (1 in 10), Jordan\n(1 in 14) and Turkey (1 in 23). [7]\n\n\n\nDeveloping countries hosted 85 per\ncent of the world\u2019s refugees and\nVenezuelans displaced abroad. The\nLeast Developed Countries provided\nasylum to 27 per cent of the total.\n#### **73%**\n\nLIVED IN NEIGHBOURING\n\nCOUNTRIES\n\n\n\nTurkey hosted 3.7 million refugees,\nthe largest population worldwide.\nColombia was second with more than\n1.7 million, including Venezuelans\ndisplaced abroad, followed by Uganda\n(1.5 million), Pakistan (1.4 million)\nand Germany (1.2 million).\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n73 per cent of refugees and\nVenezuelans displaced abroad lived\n\ncountries of origin.\n#### **68%**\nORIGINATED FROM JUST\n\n\n\nMore than two thirds (68 per cent) of all\nrefugees and Venezuelans displaced\nabroad [8] came from just five countries:\n\n\n\nMILLION\n#### **5.7**\nVENEZUELAN REFUGEES\n\n\n#### **16,300**\n\n\n\nRESETTLED\n\n\n\nFIVE COUNTRIES\n\n\n\nAND MIGRANTS\n\n\n\nREFUGEES WERE\n\n\n\nThis figure includes Venezuelan\nrefugees, migrants and asylumseekers reported through the\nCoordination Platform for Refugees\nand Migrants from Venezuela. [4]\n#### **555,400**\n\nNEW ASYLUM CLAIMS\n\n\nAsylum-seekers submitted 555,400\nnew claims. The United States of\nAmerica was the world\u2019s largest\nrecipient of new individual applications\n(72,900), followed by Germany\n(58,900), Mexico (51,700), the\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n(46,200) and France (36,500).\n\n\n\n16,300 refugees were resettled in\nthe first six months of 2021, a further\ndecrease from the 17,400 and 28,700\nin the same periods of 2020 and\n2019 respectively, according to\ngovernment statistics.\n\n\nMILLION\n#### **1.1**\nDISPLACED PEOPLE\n\nRETURNED\n\n\n1.1 million displaced people returned to\ntheir areas or countries of origin in the\nfirst half of 2021, including 936,400\ninternally displaced people and\n126,700 refugees.\n\n\n\n**1** The numbers contained in this report are rounded\n\nto millions, thousands or hundreds depending on\nthe context and the rounded numbers may not\nsum to the correct absolute figure.\n\n**2** This number excludes Venezuelan asylum\nseekers and refugees.\n\n**3** Source: Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre.\n\n**4** See the [Coordination Platform for Refugees and](https://www.r4v.info)\n\n[Migrants from Venezuela R4V.](https://www.r4v.info)\n\n**5** Limited to countries hosting at least 10,000\n\npeople. Excludes Palestine refugees under\nUNRWA's mandate.\n\n**6** When the 481,000 Palestinian refugees\n\nregistered with UNRWA living in Lebanon are\nincluded, this proportion increases to one in five.\n\n**7** In addition, Lebanon hosted 481,000 and Jordan\n\n2.3 million Palestine refugees under UNRWA\u2019s\nmandate.\n\n**8** This is the number of Venezuelan refugees and\n\nVenezuelans displaced abroad.\n\n\n\n\n\n5 Finding Solutions\n\n\n6 Stateless people\n\n\n\n1 Introduction\n\n\n2 Refugees\n\n\n\n3 Internally Displaced People\n\n\n4 Asylum-seekers\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 1\n\n\n\n\n\nFor nine consecutive years, persecution, conflict,\nviolence, human rights violations and events seriously\ndisturbing public order have fuelled an increase in\nthe number of forcibly displaced people worldwide,\na figure that stood at 82.4 million at the end of 2020.\nThis worrisome trend has continued well into 2021.\nSix months into the year, the number of refugees\nunder UNHCR\u2019s mandate had surpassed 20.8 million\n(an increase of 172,000), while the number of asylumseekers had climbed to 4.4 million (an increase of\n237,000). Although comparable figures for internal\ndisplacement are not yet available, based on the\ninformation at hand UNHCR estimates that global\nforced displacement likely exceeded 84 million by\nmid-2021. [9]\n\n\n\nIn the first half of 2021, many countries around the\nworld slowly returned to some sense of normality\nafter the tumultuous COVID-19-related events of\nthe previous year. The transition by governments\nfrom attempting to contain the spread of COVID-19\nto living with it was made possible primarily by the\nrollout of vaccination programmes. With \u201cthe global\nvaccination campaign representing the greatest moral\ntest of our times\u201d, as noted by UN Secretary-General\nAnt\u00f3nio Guterres, [10] it is encouraging that almost all\ncountries have included refugees, asylum-seekers\nand others in need of international protection in their\nnational COVID-19 vaccination plans. [11] Nevertheless,\na substantial vaccine equity gap exists between\nwealthier and low resource countries. For every\n100 people in high-income countries, 133 doses of\nCOVID-19 vaccine have been administered, while in\n\n\n\n**9** A complete overview of global forced displacement in 2021 will be presented in UNHCR\u2019s Global Trends report, to be released in June 2022.\n**10** See the [11 March statement by the UN Secretary-General on the COVID-19 pandemic](https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2021-03-11/statement-the-secretary-general-the-covid-19-pandemic-one-year)\n**11** 99 per cent of the 160 countries that responded reported including refugees and/or others of concern in their national COVID-19 vaccination\n\nplans. See the [Multi-sectoral monitoring summary.](https://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/COVID-19%20Multisectoral%20Monitoring_2021%20MIDYEAR%20RESULTS.pdf)\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 1\n\n\nlow-income countries, only 4 doses per 100 people\nhave been administered. [12] Resources are therefore\nstill needed for immunization-related activities and to\nensure last mile vaccine delivery.\n\n\nInternational protection and access to asylum\ncontinue to be life saving for many, and by mid-2021,\nasylum-seekers were able to access 117 countries, up\nfrom 108 at the start of the year and just 84 in mid2020. [13] Most of the countries that remained closed\nin mid-2021 had at least introduced some adaptive\nelements, albeit to varying degrees, rather than keep\ntheir asylum systems completely closed. However,\nhealth-related border and travel restrictions remained\nin effect in many locations, as States experienced their\nsecond or third waves of COVID-19 and continued to\nlimit access to asylum.\n\n\nConsequently, there were 555,400 new individual\nasylum applications in the first half of 2021, a\nslight increase compared to the same period in the\nprevious year, but still well below pre-pandemic\nlevels in 2019. The number of new refugee arrivals\nrecognized on a group basis dropped to 144,700, 20\nper cent lower than the comparable period in 2020,\nalso suggesting that restrictions related to COVID-19\nare still having a large impact on access to asylum\nand access to territory.\n\n\nDurable solutions for forcibly displaced populations\nremained in short supply due to unresolved and\nescalating conflicts in many countries of origin, as\nwell as the continuing restrictions on movement in\n\n\n\nresponse to COVID-19 during the first six months of\n2021. While the number of returnees did increase\ncompared to the same period of 2020 (both refugees\nand internally displaced people - IDPs), it remained\nwell below pre-COVID-19 levels during the same\nperiod of 2019. An estimated 936,000 IDPs were\nable to return to their places of habitual residence\nduring the reporting period, compared to just 126,700\nrefugee returns. The number of refugees resettled to\nthird countries, as reported by governments, dropped\nto just 16,300 in the first six months of 2021. Threequarters of them were assisted by UNHCR to depart.\n\n\nThe number of active conflicts reached a record high\nin 2020, more than at any time since 1945, despite\nthe COVID-19 pandemic and calls from the UN for\na global ceasefire. [14] In early 2021, consistent with\n2020, most armed conflicts remained internal in their\nessence. Yet many of these situations have become\nincreasingly internationalized, with interventions from\na growing number of regional and global powers.\n\n\nMore than 4.3 million new internal displacements\nwere recorded in the first six months of 2021 in the\n33 countries where UNHCR is engaged in situations\nof internal displacement. [15] This is a sharp increase\nfrom the same period of the previous year and higher\nthan pre-COVID-19 levels. Intensifying violence led\nto significant new displacements in Afghanistan,\nthe Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia,\nMozambique, Myanmar, South Sudan and countries\nin the Sahel region, [16] among other locations.\n\n\n\n**12** See [Open letter to G20 Heads of State and Government - UNHCR, IOM & WHO](https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2021/10/617bffc64/open-letter-g20-heads-state-government.html)\n**13** See [UNHCR\u2019s COVID-19 Protection Issues dashboard](https://app.powerbi.com/groups/me/apps/df148c2f-8a5e-4432-bdad-4e3d9b3e06fd/reports/7f5d3367-a2ee-46d0-ac13-605607354a73/ReportSection)\n**14** See [The Armed Conflict Survey 2021](https://www.iiss.org/blogs/analysis/2021/09/acs-2021-introduction)\n**15** UNHCR protects or assists internally displaced people in 33 countries. The total new displacement is therefore likely to underestimate internal\n\ndisplacement globally.\n**16** Significant increases were recorded in Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and Niger.\n\n\n\n2 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Map 1 **| New displacements | January-June 2021**\n\n\nMany people in countries facing increases in internal\ndisplacement in the first half of 2021 are struggling to\nfeed their families. [17] In these 18 countries, at least 1 in 9\ninhabitants were already in crisis or worse (Phase 3 or\nabove in the IPC acute food insecurity classification)\nat the end of 2020, with the food security forecast\nexpected to deteriorate further by the end of 2021\nin at least two-thirds of these countries. The most\nvulnerable in these societies, including internally\ndisplaced people, are often disproportionately\naffected. COVID-19 has exacerbated these existing\nfood insecurities. Globally, it is estimated about 30\nmillion more people may be facing hunger in 2030\n\n\n**17** See [2021 Global Report on Food Crises](https://www.fsinplatform.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/GRFC%202021%20050521%20med.pdf)\n**18** See [The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World, 2021](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/SOFI2021_InBrief_English-1.pdf)\n\n\n\nChapter 1\n\n\nthan if the pandemic had not occurred, due primarily\nto greater inequality in access to food. [18]\n\n\nThis report provides a snapshot of displacement and\nsolutions trends in the first half of 2021. The figures\npresented here were collected from governments and\nUNHCR offices around the world and supplemented,\nwhere needed, with data from non-governmental\norganizations. Unless otherwise specified, figures\nrelate solely to events occurring up to 30 June\n2021. The statistics included in this report should be\nconsidered provisional and subject to change.\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "CHAPTER 2\n\n\n**DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO.** _Following clashes_\n_between government forces and armed groups,_\n_this orphaned four-year-old was forced to flee the_\n_Central African Republic with his grandmother._\n_Without any source of livelihood, and insufficient_\n_emergency assistance, the family can barely afford_\n_one meal a day. Hundreds of Central African_\n_refugee children have been detected with various_\n_forms of acute malnutrition._\n\n**\u00a9 UNHCR/CLARIS NEH MOKOM ACHU**\n\n\n4 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "The number of refugees [19] globally continued to\nincrease during the first six months of 2021, reaching\n20.8 million, 172,000 more than at the end of 2020. In\naddition, there were 3.9 million Venezuelans displaced\nabroad at mid-2021, an increase of 82,000 from end2020. Unless otherwise stated, all references to\n\u201cpeople displaced across borders\u201d in this document\nrefer to both of these populations.\n\n##### **New recognition of refugees**\n\n\nDuring the first six months of 2021, nearly 385,000\npeople were granted international protection either\non an individual (240,200) or group (144,700) basis.\nThis is broadly consistent with the same period in\n2020 (398,500).\n\n\nMore than half of all new recognitions were from\njust five countries. More than 71,800 people fled\nthe Central African Republic, where large scale\nelection-related violence erupted at the end of 2020.\nFighting between state forces and armed groups also\ncontinues, notably in the northwest of the country. In\nSouth Sudan, the 2018 peace agreement has resulted\nin reduced hostilities among the main conflicting\nparties, but intercommunal violence has continued\nto increase and is largely driven by competition\nover dwindling resources and recurring cattle theft.\n\n\n\nChapter 2\n\n###### + EXPLORE THE DATA\n\n[+ By origin](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=kMk85i)\n[and asylum](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=kMk85i)\n\n\nAs such, 61,700 people from South Sudan became\nrefugees in the first half of 2021. Significant numbers\nof people from Syria (38,800), Afghanistan (25,200)\nand Nigeria (20,300) were newly recognized as\nrefugees during the first six months of 2021.\n\nIn addition, in the same period there were 92,100\nnewly displaced Venezuelans in Latin America and\nthe Caribbean. A further 16,100 Venezuelans were\nindividually recognized. [20]\n\n##### **By country of origin**\n\n\nAs in previous years, more than eight out of ten people\ndisplaced across borders (82 per cent) originated\nfrom just ten countries of origin, and these remained\nvirtually unchanged since end-2020 (see Figure 1).\nMore than a quarter of all people displaced were from\nSyria (27 per cent), which continues to account for the\nworld\u2019s largest refugee population. Nearly 6.8 million\nSyrian refugees were hosted by 129 countries. Turkey\ncontinued to host more than half of Syrian refugees\n(3.7 million). Other countries with large populations\nof Syrian refugees were Lebanon (851,700), Jordan\n(668,300), Germany (616,300) and Iraq (246,000).\n\n\n\n**19** Includes people in refugee-like situations.\n**20** This includes in Spain, where some 8,600 Venezuelans were protected under a special humanitarian regime in the first half of 2021.\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        6
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 2\n\n\nFigure 1 **| People displaced across borders by country of origin | mid-2021**\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\n\n\n\n\nVenezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)\n\nAfghanistan\n\nSouth Sudan\n\nMyanmar\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\nSudan\n\nSomalia\n\nCentral African Republic\n\nEritrea\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nVenezuelans \u2013 with 186,800 refugees and a further\n3.9 million Venezuelans displaced abroad \u2013 were\nthe second largest group of people displaced across\nborders. They were seeking refuge in 62 countries\nglobally, although more than 92 per cent of them\nremained in Latin America and the Caribbean,\nincluding Colombia (1.7 million), Peru (518,400), Chile\n(483,400) and Ecuador (447,100).\n\nMounting insecurity in Afghanistan during the first half\nof 2021 forced many Afghans to flee. More than 2.6\nmillion Afghan refugees were living in 97 countries\nat mid-year, making Afghanistan the third largest\ncountry of origin for refugees. Some 85 per cent\nof Afghan refugees were hosted by neighbouring\nPakistan (1.4 million) and the Islamic Republic of Iran\n(780,000). Germany hosted 152,700 Afghan refugees\n\n\n\nat mid-year, which is about 6 per cent of the global\nAfghan refugee population.\n\n##### **By country of asylum**\n\n\nMore than half of all people displaced across borders\nwere hosted by just ten countries (see Figure 2),\nwhich have remained broadly consistent in recent\nyears. Many of these countries hosted large groups\nof refugees from just one or two countries of origin.\nAt mid-2021, Turkey hosted some 3.7 million Syrians,\nColombia hosted 1.7 million Venezuelans, and Uganda\nhosted 923,500 South Sudanese and 429,500\nCongolese refugees, while Pakistan hosted over 1.4\nmillion Afghans. Germany provided asylum to 1.2\nmillion refugees, including 616,300 Syrians, 152,700\nAfghans and 147,400 Iraqis.\n\n\n\nFigure 2 **| People displaced across borders by host country | mid-2021**\n\n\nTurkey\n\n\n\n3,696,800\n\n\n\nColombia\n\nUganda\n\nPakistan\n\nGermany\n\nSudan\n\nBangladesh\n\nLebanon\n\nIran (Islamic Republic of)\n\nEthiopia\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n6 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        7
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 2\n\n\n\n**Key facts for countries hosting the world\u2019s refugees and Venezuelans displaced abroad | Mid-2021**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|73 per cent hosted by<br>neighbouring countries|Most people fleeing conflict and persecution prefer to remain in close<br>proximity to their country or region of origin. The statistical evidence<br>shows that nearly three-quarters of people displaced across borders<br>stay in neighbouring countries.|\n|---|---|\n|**85 per cent are hosted by**<br>**developing countries**21|Developing countries continued to shoulder a disproportionately large<br>responsibility for hosting displaced populations.|\n|**83 per cent are hosted by lower-**<br>**and middle-income countries**|According to World Bank classifcation,22 high-income countries host<br>just 17 per cent of people displaced across borders. Upper-middle<br>income countries \u2013 including Turkey, Colombia, the Islamic Republic<br>of Iran, Lebanon and Jordan \u2013 hosted 43 per cent of people displaced<br>across borders. A further 18 per cent were hosted by lower-middle-<br>income countries and 22 per cent by low-income countries.|\n|**27 per cent are hosted by the**<br>**Least Developed Countries**23|The Least Developed Countries \u2013 including Bangladesh, Chad, the<br>Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Rwanda, South Sudan,<br>Sudan, Uganda, the United Republic of Tanzania and Yemen \u2013 were<br>home to 14 per cent of the world\u2019s population. Accounting for just<br>1.3 per cent of the global Gross Domestic Product,24 they had the<br>least amount of resources available to meet the needs of those<br>seeking refuge. Yet together they hosted 6.8 million refugees.|\n\n\n\nMap 2 **| Refugees, people in refugee-like situations and Venezuelans displaced abroad | mid-2021**\n\n\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n\n\n**21** See [UN Statistical Division's Standard country or area codes for statistical use (M49) for a list of countries included under each region.](https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/)\n**22** See [World Bank Country and Lending Groups](https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups)\n**23** See [UN Statistical Division's Standard country or area codes for statistical use (M49) for a list of Least Developed Countries.](https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/)\n**24** Source World Bank GDP data\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 7\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "World Bank GDP data",
-          "confidence": 0.7979313731193542,
-          "start": 509,
-          "end": 513
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UN Statistical Division",
-          "confidence": 0.7043229937553406,
-          "start": 476,
-          "end": 479
-        },
-        "producer": {
-          "text": "World Bank",
-          "confidence": 0.5142913460731506,
-          "start": 460,
-          "end": 462
-        },
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.8422765135765076,
-          "start": 520,
-          "end": 521
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "Least Developed Countries",
-          "confidence": 0.779310941696167,
-          "start": 496,
-          "end": 499
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        8
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 2\n\n\n**ETHIOPIA.** _Internally displaced women and_\n_children gather in the Afar region in Ethiopia._\n_Thousands of civilians have been killed, injured_\n_or subjected to gender-based violence as_\n_a result of the conflict in the Tigray region._\n_The vast majority of those internally displaced_\n_within the country are women and children._\n\n**\u00a9 UNHCR/ALESSANDRO PASTA**\n\n\n8 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        9
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 3\n\n###### + EXPLORE THE DATA\n\n[+ By origin](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=98ljJV)\n\n[+ IDP returns](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=72ZK7g)\n\n## **People**\n\n\n\nIn the first half of 2021, millions more people were\nforced to flee their homes due to armed conflicts,\ngeneralized violence or human rights violations. Many\nof them faced additional challenges due to COVID-19,\ndisasters, extreme weather and other effects of\nclimate change. UNHCR continues to respond to\nsituations of internal displacement in 33 countries,\nand by mid-2021 the number of internally displaced\n\n\n\npeople (IDPs) due to conflict and violence had risen\nto nearly 50.9 million (see Figure 3), almost 5 per\ncent more than the 48.6 million reported at the end of\n2020. More than 4.3 million new displacements were\nreported by 18 countries (see Figure 4), 50 per cent\nmore than the estimated 2.9 million people displaced\nduring the same period in the previous year.\n\n\n\nFigure 3 **| Countries with the largest number of new internal displacements | January\u2013June 2021**\n\n\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\n\nEthiopia\n\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nMyanmar\n\n\nCentral African Republic\n\n\nSouth Sudan\n\n\nNigeria\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\n\nMozambique\n\n\nBurkina Faso\n\n\n\n\n\n1,308,500\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 9\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        10
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 3\n\n\nFigure 4 **| IDPs of concern to UNHCR | 2010 \u2013 mid-2021**\n\n\n60\n\n\n50\n\n\n\n40\n\n\n30\n\n\n20\n\n\n10\n\n\n0\n\n\n\n2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 mid-2021\n\n\n\nConsistent with 2020, Africa witnessed the most\nnew internal displacements as conflict and violence\nflared in several countries across the continent.\nSome 1.3 million new displacements were recorded\nin the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Ethiopia,\nconflict in the Tigray region and increasing insecurity\nin other parts of the country triggered more than 1.2\nmillion new displacements. In Mozambique\u2019s northern\nprovince of Cabo Delgado, conflict continued\nunabated, uprooting just over 120,000 people, with\na significant escalation of violence in Palma town in\nlate March. A crisis of governance and instability in\nrural areas of Burkina Faso linked to the presence\nof armed insurgents has impacted the protection\nof civilians, further fuelling the fastest growing\ninternal displacement crisis, with almost 120,000\nnew displacements in the first six months of 2021. In\naddition, large new displacements occurred in the\nCentral African Republic, South Sudan and Nigeria\n(202,000, 170,000 and 165,000 respectively). [25]\n\n\n\nInternal displacement also surged in the Asia-Pacific\nregion, particularly in Afghanistan and Myanmar.\nIn February, the military coup in Myanmar ignited\nwidespread violence, bringing the total number of\ninternally displaced people to an estimated 567,000,\n54 per cent higher than the 370,000 at the end of 2020.\nIn May, as drawdowns of foreign forces in Afghanistan\ncontinued, the Taliban launched a major offensive in\nnearly all provinces in the country, sparking a sharp\nincrease in new internal displacements.\n\n\nIn the Middle East and North Africa, some 144,000\nnew internal displacements were reported in Syria.\nIn Yemen, 41,000 new displacements occurred, with\nApril\u2019s heavy rains and flooding in several parts of the\ncountry affecting some 7,000 people, 75 per cent of\nwhom were IDPs living in sub-standard conditions. [26]\n\n\n\n**25** See the refugee chapter on page 5 for background on the new displacements in the Central African Republic and South Sudan. In Nigeria, new\n\ndisplacements were primarily due to the fragile security situation in Borno, Adamawa and Yobe (the BAY States).\n**26** OCHA Yemen (2021). [Humanitarian Update, Issue 5](https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Humanitarian%20Update_May%202021%20v4.pdf)\n\n\n\n10 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        11
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Figure 5 **| IDPs protected/assisted by UNHCR | mid-2021 (in millions)**\n\n\nColombia\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\n\n\n\n\nChapter 3\n\n\n8.1\n\n\n\n\n\nYemen\n\nEthiopia\n\nAfghanistan\n\nSomalia\n\nNigeria\n\nSudan\n\nSouth Sudan\n\n##### **Path to solutions**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIn the first six months of 2021, an estimated 936,000\nIDP returnees were reported in 13 countries, a 48 per\ncent increase compared to the same period in 2020,\nalthough well below pre-COVID-19 levels. More than\n40 per cent of these returns, some 395,000, were\nreported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,\nwith many people returning home soon after the\nvolcanic eruption in North Kivu in May. Large numbers\nof returns were also reported in the Central African\nRepublic (168,000) and the Philippines (132,000).\n\n\n\nPursuing voluntary, safe and dignified solutions for\nmillions of IDPs remains a critical priority for UNHCR.\nThis includes supporting law and policy making\nprocesses that reduce needs due to displacement\nand help IDPs enjoy their rights without discrimination.\nIn Somalia, UNHCR supported the development of a\nnational durable solutions strategy, representing an\nimportant milestone in finding solutions for many IDPs\nexperiencing protracted displacement in the country.\nIn Mozambique, in collaboration with partners, UNHCR\nsupported the government in developing a Policy\nand Strategy on Displacement Management that\naddresses all causes and all phases of displacement,\nfrom prevention through to durable solutions.\n\n\n\nMap 3 **| IDPs protected/assisted by UNHCR | mid-2021**\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 11\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        12
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "CHAPTER 4\n\n\n\n\n\n12 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        13
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 4\n\n###### + EXPLORE THE DATA\n\n[+ Asylum](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=UzAr5Z)\n[applications](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=UzAr5Z)\n\n[+ Asylum](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=B2FlDt)\n[decisions](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=B2FlDt)\n\n[+ Pending asylum](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=lQ26Lh)\n[applications](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=lQ26Lh)\nat mid-2021\n\n\n\nThe total number of new individual asylum applications\nlodged globally with States or UNHCR during the\nfirst half of 2021 was 555,400 (see Figure 6), a slight\nincrease from the same period in the previous year\n(554,000). This figure is still significantly below the\npre-COVID-19 levels in 2019 (862,300). There was a\nmuch larger increase in the countries where UNHCR\nconducts Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under\nits mandate. In these locations, the number of new\nindividual asylum applications grew by almost one\n\n\nthird (31 per cent) to 35,000, [27] whereas in countries\nwhere the Government conducts RSD the number of\nnew individual asylum applications dropped marginally\nto 520,100. There was also a large decrease in the\nnumber of new arrivals recognized on a group basis to\n144,700, 20 per cent lower than the comparable period\nin 2020, suggesting that COVID-related restrictions\nare still having a large impact on access to asylum and\naccess to territory (see Figure 7).\n\n\n\nFigure 6 **| Major source countries of new asylum applications | January\u2013June 2021**\n\n\nCentral African Republic\n\n\nSyrian Arab Republic\n\nVenezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nHonduras\n\nAfghanistan\n\n\nC\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire\n\nHaiti\n\nNicaragua\n\n\nGuatemala\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|Col1|Col2|Col3|Col4|4<br>45,8<br>39,300<br>0|7,700<br>00|\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n||||33,90<br>31,200<br>900|33,90<br>31,200<br>900|33,90<br>31,200<br>900|\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||25,<br>600<br>0<br> <br>|25,<br>600<br>0<br> <br>|25,<br>600<br>0<br> <br>|25,<br>600<br>0<br> <br>|\n|||||||\n||16,<br>14,60<br>13,400<br>13,300|16,<br>14,60<br>13,400<br>13,300|16,<br>14,60<br>13,400<br>13,300|16,<br>14,60<br>13,400<br>13,300|16,<br>14,60<br>13,400<br>13,300|\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n\n\n\n**27** It should be noted, however, that as per the discussion in the [2020 Global Trends Report](https://www.unhcr.org/60b638e37/unhcr-global-trends-2020) on strategic use of RSD in mandate RSD procedures,\n\napproximately 20 per cent of these applications to UNHCR mandate procedures may not be in need of RSD processing.\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 13\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "asylum applications",
-          "confidence": 0.5205936431884766,
-          "start": 54,
-          "end": 56
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.652273952960968,
-          "start": 61,
-          "end": 62
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.9079872369766235,
-          "start": 67,
-          "end": 68
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "2020 Global Trends Report",
-          "confidence": 0.8273525834083557,
-          "start": 710,
-          "end": 714
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Report",
-          "confidence": 0.6419224739074707,
-          "start": 713,
-          "end": 714
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.8523394465446472,
-          "start": 735,
-          "end": 736
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Global",
-          "confidence": 0.6841867566108704,
-          "start": 711,
-          "end": 712
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2020",
-          "confidence": 0.88485187292099,
-          "start": 710,
-          "end": 711
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.9990680813789368,
-          "start": 751,
-          "end": 754
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.845318078994751,
-          "start": 753,
-          "end": 754
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.9194414615631104,
-          "start": 754,
-          "end": 755
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.8233229517936707,
-          "start": 754,
-          "end": 755
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        14
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 4\n\n\nOverall, the total number of individual applications\nduring the first six months of 2021 was 708,800, an\nincrease of 4 per cent from the 679,300 applications\nthe year before, as repeat and appeal applications\n\n\n\ncontinue to increase. As individuals making these\napplications would already be in the asylum\ncountry, COVID-19 restrictions have less impact on\nsuch applications.\n\n\n\nFigure 7 **| Type of recognition by country of asylum | January\u2013June 2021**\n\n\n\nGermany\n\n\nSudan\n\n\nDemocratic Republic of the Congo\n\n\nUganda\n\n\nChad\n\n\nFrance\n\n\nCanada\n\n\nCameroon\n\n\nMexico\n\n\nOthers\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe substantive number of asylum cases processed [28]\nalso rose in the first six months of 2021, reaching\n509,200, five per cent more than during the same\nperiod in 2020. [29] In some countries, it was not possible\nto conduct interviews during the initial stages of\nCOVID-19 in 2020 due to lockdowns, so emphasis\nwas placed on processing already interviewed cases,\nleading to increased decision-making in the short\nterm, at the expense of commencing processing of\nnew cases. For example, in countries where UNHCR\nconducts RSD under its mandate, the overall number\nof substantive decisions made in the first six months\nof 2021 decreased by 44 per cent to 12,300. This was\nlargely due to the suspension of new interviews in\nEgypt for three months in early 2020, which yielded\nmore decisions. Other UNHCR operations, such as\nMauritania, reached more substantive decisions in\nthe first half of 2021 \u2013 up from 650 to 1,700.\n\n\n\nIn countries where national governments conduct RSD,\nthere was a net increase in the number of substantive\ndecisions. Some countries decided significantly\nmore cases, including Austria, Belgium, and Canada.\nEspecially noteworthy was France, where the number\nof substantive decisions increased by 77 per cent,\nfrom 53,500 in the first six months of 2020 to 95,000\nin the first half of 2021. Conversely, other countries,\nsuch as Greece, Australia and the United States of\nAmerica produced fewer substantive decisions in\n2021. It is not clear whether these decreases resulted\nfrom changing caseload dynamics, COVID-related\nchallenges, realigned priorities or other factors.\n\n\nThe Total Protection Rate, or TPR, is the percentage\nof substantive decisions that resulted in any form of\ninternational protection. Worldwide, this figure stood\nat 46 per cent in the first six months of 2021, consistent\nwith the previous year.\n\n\n\n**28** Substantive decisions include Convention status, complementary and other forms of protection, and rejected cases. Non-substantive decisions\n\nare the closure of a case without a decision on the merits. For example, from the death of the applicant, no-show for interview, withdrawal of the\napplication, abandonment of the claim, or the determination that another country is responsible for the claim, among other factors.\n**29** In addition, 215,800 non-substantive decisions were recorded in the first six months of 2021.\n\n\n\n14 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        15
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "In the first six months of 2021, asylum applications\nwere most commonly lodged by nationals from\nSyria, Afghanistan, the Central African Republic,\nVenezuela and Honduras. This was quite similar\nto the first half of 2020, except for the rapid rise in\nasylum-seekers from the Central African Republic,\nwho lodged 47,800 applications between January\nand June 2021 (mostly in DRC: 45,900), compared\nto 1,700 in the first half of 2020.\n\n\nAt the end of June 2021, the number of pending\nindividual asylum applications of all types stood at\n4.4 million, nearly 7 per cent more than the 4.1 million\n\n\n\nChapter 4\n\n\npending at the end of 2020. This trend is concerning,\nas lengthy backlogs heighten the risk that individuals\nwith international protection needs will not be able\nto access protection and solutions in a timely and\neffective manner. If backlogs become protracted\nand asylum-seekers wait multiple years for a final\ndetermination of their claims without meaningful\naccess to rights or certainty about their future, there\nwill be negative consequences for everyone, including\nerosion of public confidence in the system, increased\ncosts, and difficulties in returning rejected applicants.\n\n\n\nMap 4 **| Asylum-seekers (with pending cases) | mid-2021**\n\n\nA country is named if it features among the five largest per population group.\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 15\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        16
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "CHAPTER 5\n\n\n**SOUTH SUDAN.** _Displaced families return_\n_home to the Upper Nile State with help_\n_from UNHCR. Conflict broke out in South_\n_Sudan in late 2013, resulting in a cycle of_\n_inter-communal conflict and a humanitarian_\n_crisis. Efforts to implement the national_\n_peace process have encouraged some_\n_375,000 South Sudanese refugees to_\n_return voluntarily since November 2017_\n_and a further 1.6 million internally displaced_\n_people have also returned home._\n\n**\u00a9 UNHCR/IGOR IATLUK**\n\n\n16 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        17
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 5\n\n###### + EXPLORE THE DATA\n\n[+ Refugee returns](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=Uw6qYQ)\n\n[+ Resettlement](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=vg13xD)\narrivals\n\n[+ Naturalisation](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=oRm071)\n\n[+ IDP returns](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=72ZK7g)\n\n\n\nIdentifying and supporting durable solutions that\nenable refugees to rebuild their lives and to live in\nsafety and dignity is a strategic priority for UNHCR\nand the humanitarian community, as emphasized\nin the Global Compact on Refugees. Traditionally,\ndurable solutions include voluntary repatriation,\nlocal integration and resettlement to a third country.\nHowever, as has been the case for several years,\nonly a small fraction of displaced populations were\nable to find a safe and lasting solution in the first\nhalf of 2021.\n\n\n##### **Returns**\n\nReturning home in safety and dignity based on a free\nand informed choice remains the preferred solution for\nmost of the world\u2019s refugees. In the first half of 2021, an\nestimated 126,700 refugees returned to 23 countries of\norigin from 41 countries of asylum (see Figure 8). Some\nof these returns were facilitated by UNHCR and its\npartners, while others were self-organized. While this\nmarks a 23 per cent increase from the same period in\n2020 (102,600), the number of returns remains slightly\nbelow the pre-pandemic levels in 2019 (131,000).\n\n\n\nFigure 8 **| Refugee returns by country of origin | mid-2021**\n\n\nSouth Sudan\n\n\n\n\n\n65,600\n\n\n\nBurundi\n\n\nSyria\n\n\nNigeria\n\n\nMali\n\n\nOthers\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 17\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        18
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 5\n\n\nAs in recent years, most returnees in the first half\nof 2021 were South Sudanese (45,900) returning\nprimarily from Sudan (27,700), Ethiopia (13,000) and\nUganda (2,900). Overall, there were some 30 per\ncent fewer South Sudanese returnees than in the\nsame period of 2020, primarily due to fewer returns\nfrom Uganda.\n\n\nUNHCR and its partners continued to facilitate the\nrepatriation of Burundians from neighbouring countries.\nThe 44,700 Burundian refugees who were assisted\nto return in the first half of 2021 were mainly from\nRwanda (20,300 or 46 per cent), the United Republic\nof Tanzania (20,100 or 45 per cent) and the Democratic\nRepublic of the Congo (3,700 or 8 per cent).\n\n##### **Resettlement**\n\n\nIncreasingly protracted conflicts prevented most\nrefugees from safely returning home, even as\nlimited possibilities of local integration and the\nglobal COVID-19 pandemic put many refugees in\nan even more precarious situation. Resettlement\nand complementary pathways continued to be\ncritical ways to protect some of the most vulnerable\nrefugees, who may face specific or urgent protection\nrisks. It is a tangible way for States to show solidarity\nand share responsibility.\n\n\nHowever, the number of refugees resettled has\nyet to recover from the dramatic decrease in 2020,\namid continuing movement restrictions due to the\npandemic. In the first half of 2021, according to\ngovernment statistics, the number of people resettled\nfell again to just 16,300, compared to 17,400 and 28,700\nin the same periods of 2020 and 2019 respectively.\nMore than half of the refugees were resettled with\nUNHCR\u2019s assistance. The 2021 figure represents\njust 20 per cent of the goal to resettle 80,000\npeople during the year as envisaged in the ThreeYear Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary\nPathways. [30] Overall, UNHCR identified more than 1.4\nmillion people in need of resettlement in 2021. [31]\n\n\n\nThe United States of America remained the most\ncommon destination, receiving about 3,800\nresettled refugees in the first half of 2021. This is\nnevertheless the lowest number of refugees that\nthe United States of America has resettled in many\nyears. The United States of America was followed\nby Canada, which resettled nearly 2,900 refugees,\ndown from 4,400 in the first six months of 2020.\nMore positively, European countries resettled a total\nof 8,900 refugees, accounting for 55 per cent of the\nglobal total and 93 per cent more than in the same\nperiod of 2020. Notably, Sweden and Germany\nresettled 2,500 and 2,200 refugees respectively.\n\n\nOver two-thirds of the resettled refugees\noriginated from just three countries, each with\nprotracted displacement situations: Syria (6,700),\nthe Democratic Republic of the Congo (2,500) and\nAfghanistan (1,700).\n\n##### **Local Integration**\n\n\nBuilding a new life in their country of asylum offers\nrefugees a solution when resettlement or voluntary\nrepatriation are not viable options. Typically, this\nincludes the provision of a legal status in refugees\u2019\ncountry of asylum, including appropriate alternatives\nunder domestic regulations on long-term residence.\n\n\nDuring the first half of 2021, about 20,100 refugees\nfrom 130 countries of origin naturalized in 17\ncountries, [32] representing no significant change\ncompared to the 20,300 naturalized during the same\nperiod in the previous year. The vast majority of them\nnaturalized in the Netherlands (16,800), France (1,700)\nand Canada (1,400). Over two-thirds of the naturalized\nrefugees originated from Syria (11,100) and Eritrea\n(2,900). Given the lack of comprehensive data, these\nfigures should be considered as indicative only.\n\n\nWith more people becoming displaced and fewer\nbeing able to return, resettle or naturalize, an\nincreasing number continue to find themselves in\nprotracted displacement situations.\n\n\n\n**30** See [The Three-Year Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways, 2019.](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5d15db254/three-yearstrategy-resettlement-complementary-pathways.html)\n**31** See [UNHCR Projected Global Resettlement Needs 2021](https://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5ef34bfb7/projected-global-resettlement-needs-2021-pdf.html)\n**32** It should be noted that data on naturalization often does not distinguish between migrants and refugees in national statistical systems.\n\n\n18 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        19
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "CHAPTER 6\n\n\n\n**BANGLADESH.** _Rohingya refugee_\n\n\n\n_children play with marbles in_\n_a camp in eastern Bangladesh._\n\n_Heavy monsoon rains and_\n_strong winds have caused flash_\n\n_floods and landslides, severely_\n_disrupting the lives of refugees_\n\n\n\n_living in the camp, especially_\n\n\n\n_children and women._\n\n\n\n**\u00a9 UNHCR/AMOS HALDER**\n\n\n**UNHCR >** **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** **19**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        20
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 6\n\n\n###### + EXPLORE THE DATA\n\n[+ By asylum](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/download/?url=MZy2ku)\n\n\n\nImproving the availability of high-quality statistics on\nstatelessness remains a challenge for governments\nas well as for UNHCR and its partners. As such,\nthe actual number of stateless people in the world\nremains unknown. Approximately half of all countries\nworldwide do not report data on statelessness,\nincluding many with known stateless populations.\nData is currently available for 94 countries, with a\ntotal of 4.3 million stateless people [33] reported to\nUNHCR in mid-2021, virtually the same as the figure\nreported at end-2020. For many of these countries,\nthe data provided may be partial and is often based\non estimates. The true number of stateless people\nglobally is therefore likely to be much higher.\n\n\nAlthough the reported total number of stateless people\nhas remained essentially constant since the end of\n2020, this figure masks some notable increases and\ndecreases. The Russian Federation and Uzbekistan\neach witnessed a significant reduction in the number\nof stateless people due to acquisition or confirmation\nof nationality during the reporting period. At the same\ntime, natural population growth of Rohingya refugees\nled to an increase in the reported numbers of stateless\npeople in countries hosting Rohingya refugees.\nStateless people are now for the first time reported\nfor Rwanda, following a government assessment\nand estimate of the statelessness situation in the\ncountry. The numbers of reported stateless people\n\n\n\nalso rose significantly in Thailand, where the Royal\nThai Government has now included a previously\nunreported group, leading to a more accurate picture\nand more comprehensive statelessness statistics\nin the country. The largest stateless populations at\nmid-2021 were reported in C\u00f4te d\u2019Ivoire (953,000),\nBangladesh (889,000 refugees), Myanmar (600,000)\nand Thailand (554,100).\n\n\nUNHCR continues to advocate for improved data\non statelessness in line with Action 10 of the Global\nAction Plan to End Statelessness by 2024. [34] In addition\nto the 38 State pledges [35] related to improving data on\nstatelessness delivered at the High-Level Segment\non Statelessness organized by UNHCR in October\n2019, UNHCR has developed a Quick Guide on\nResearching Statelessness, which may further assist\nrelevant actors interested in gathering more reliable\nstatistics on statelessness. [36] UNHCR is also working\nwith States and partners under the auspices of the\nExpert Group on Refugee and IDP Statistics (EGRIS)\nto develop International Recommendations on\nStatelessness Statistics (IROSS), which are planned\nto be submitted to the UN Statistical Commission for\nadoption in 2023. The recommendations will provide\nconcrete guidance on how to improve the production,\ncoordination, reporting and overall quality of official\nstatistics on statelessness.\n\n\n\n**33** These statistics cover stateless people and people of undetermined nationality.\n**34** See [Global Action Plan to End Statelessness 2014\u20132024](https://www.unhcr.org/54621bf49.html)\n**35** See [High-Level Segment On Statelessness: Results and Highlights page 41.](https://www.refworld.org/docid/5ec3e91b4.html)\n**36** See [Quick Guides: Researching Statelessness](https://www.refworld.org/docid/6054c9ca4.html)\n\n\n20 UNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021**\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        21
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "Chapter 6\n\n\nMap 5 **| Statelessness | mid-2021**\n\n\nThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.\n\n##### **Who Is Included In UNHCR Statistics?**\n\nUNHCR collates population data relating to persons who are forcibly displaced or\nstateless. The data is sourced primarily from governments and also from UNHCR\n[operations. See https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/methodology/ for the](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/methodology/)\ndetailed description and definitions of who is included in these statistics.\n\n##### **Annex tables 1 and 2**\n\n\n**Download from the UNHCR website at:**\n[https://www.unhcr.org/statistics/2021MYTannex.zip](https://www.unhcr.org/statistics/2021MYTannex.zip)\nAll data are provisional and subject to change.\n[Data is available at: https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/)\n\n\nUNHCR > **MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT 2021** 21\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "UNHCR Statistics",
-          "confidence": 0.9780826568603516,
-          "start": 47,
-          "end": 49
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9784849286079407,
-          "start": 47,
-          "end": 48
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.616863489151001,
-          "start": 149,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "MID-YEAR TRENDS REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.6212474703788757,
-          "start": 146,
-          "end": 149
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "REPORT",
-          "confidence": 0.5142994523048401,
-          "start": 148,
-          "end": 149
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.9588547348976135,
-          "start": 47,
-          "end": 48
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2021",
-          "confidence": 0.8524574041366577,
-          "start": 149,
-          "end": 150
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        22
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "# **MID-YEAR** TRENDS **2021**\n\n**PRODUCED AND PRINTED BY UNHCR**\n\n\n\n**FRONT COVER:**\n\n\n\n**MOZAMBIQUE.** _**A displaced mother fetches water with her children**_\n_**in Cabo Delgado Province. A conflict is raging in the region since**_\n_**2017 and extreme violence, including arbitrary killings and rape**_\n_**by armed groups, has been reported.**_\n\n\n\n\u00a9 UNHCR /MARTIM GRAY PEREIRA\n\n\n\n**\u00a9 2021 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees**\nAll rights reserved. Reproductions and translations are\nauthorized, provided UNHCR is acknowledged as the source.\n\n\nStatistics and Demographics Section\nUNHCR Global Data Service\nUN City, Marmorvej 51\n2100 Copenhagen, Denmark\n[stats@unhcr.org](mailto:stats%40unhcr.org?subject=)\n\n\nThis document along with further information on\nglobal displacement is available on UNHCR\u2019s\nstatistics website:\n[https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics](https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/)\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/82a0e7d6-a3e2-326c-b936-e8e10c580ea7/618ae4694.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        23
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]

annotation_data/unhcr_extractions/doc_143/raw/doc_143_direct_judged.jsonl

@@ -1,334 +0,0 @@
-[
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n# Refugee and Migrant Children in Europe\n### Accompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated\n\n#### Overview of Trends January - September 2017\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n##### Arrivals to Europe between January and September 2017 [1]\n\nBetween January and September 2017, 25,379 children arrived in Greece, Italy, Spain and Bulgaria, of whom 14,839 (58%) were\nunaccompanied or separated children (UASC) [2] . Arrival of UASC increased by 25% compared to the first half of 2017 (11,918).\n\n\n##### Greece\n\nBetween January and\nSeptember 2017, 7,257 [3] children\narrived to Greece by sea,\nincluding 838 (11%) UASC. [4]\nWhile this is 88% decrease\ncompared to the same period\nin 2016 (62,136), the number\nof children arrived in the third\nquarter of 2017 (4,237) exceeded\nthat of children who arrived in the\nfirst half of the year (3,020). This\nalso included a sharp spike in\nthe number of UASC registered\nin the third quarter (two-fold\nincrease compared to the first\nhalf of 2017, when 411 UASC\nwere registered).\n\n\n\nThe majority of children arriving to\nGreece by sea were from Syria, Iraq,\nAfghanistan and Kuwait.\n##### Italy\n\nAmong the 15,140 children who\narrived to Italy between January\nand September 2017, 92%\n(13,867) were unaccompanied\nor separated. This is a 27%\ndecrease compared to the\nsame period in 2016 (19,000).\nThe smaller numbers of UASC\narriving this year is mainly due\nto the overall drop in the number\nof people crossing the Central\nMediterranean since July 2017.\nMost of them originated from\n\n\n\nGuinea, C\u00f4te d'Ivoire, The\nGambia and Bangladesh.\n##### Bulgaria\n\nBetween January and\nSeptember 2017, 552 children\nwere intercepted at border\ncrossing points and within\nthe territory of the country. [5]\nAmong those, 28% were\nunaccompanied or separated\nchildren (154) which is 91%\ndecrease compared to the same\nperiod in 2016. Most children\nwere from Iraq, Syrian Arab\nRepublic and Afghanistan.\n\n\n##### Spain\n\nBetween January and September\n2017, 2,430 children arrived to Spain\nby sea and land, most commonly\nfrom Morocco (962), Syrian Arab\nRepublic (740) and Algeria (218).\nDue to the increase in arrivals to\nSpain in the third quarter of 2017,\nthe number of child arrivals also\nincreased by 44% compared to\nthe first half of 2017 (995). Data on\nunaccompanied and separated\nchildren is not available from the\nSpanish Ministry of Interior.\n\n\n1\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        0
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n\nDemographic of Arrivals, Including Accompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated Children\n\n\n##### Greece Italy\n\n\n##### Bulgaria\n\n\n\n\n\n\n##### Spain\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n**89%**\n\n\n\nACCOMPANIED\n\n\n\n\n\nAccompanied, Unaccompanied and Separated Children by\nCountry of Arrival\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSource: Hellenic Police, EKKA, Italian Ministry of Interior, Bulgaria State Agency for Refugees, Bulgarian Helsinki Committee,\nSpanish Ministry of Interior.\n\n\n\n**72%**\n\nACCOMPANIED\n\n\nNationality of Accompanied and Unaccompanied and\nSeparated Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\nAccompanied Children by Country of Origin and Arrival\n\n\nUASC by Country of Origin and Arrival\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Demographic of Arrivals",
-          "confidence": 0.8808284997940063,
-          "start": 9,
-          "end": 12
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.6405840516090393,
-          "start": 0,
-          "end": 1
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.8246034979820251,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.77974534034729,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        1
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n\nGender Breakdown of All Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\n\nIn all counties of arrival, the proportion of boys compared to girls\nremains higher (on average 7 boys for every 3 girl).\n\n\nBOYS GIRLS\n\n\nGreece **59%** **41%**\n\n\nItaly **93%** **7%**\n\n\nBulgaria **67%** **33%**\n\n\nFor Italy, the calculation is based on the estimated 18,491 UASC\naccommodated in the government shelters according to the\nMinistry of Labour and not the total number of UASC who arrived\nin between January and September 2017.\n\n\nSource: Hellenic Police, EKKA, Italian Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees,\n\nBulgarian Helsinki Committee\n\n\nAge Breakdown of Accompanied and Unaccompanied and\n\nSeparated Children by Country of Arrival\n\n\nAmong the 6,837 accompanied children who arrived to Greece\nand Bulgaria, 34% were between 0 and 4 years old, 47% were\nbetween 5 and 14 years old and 20% were between 15 and 17\nyears old. An age breakdown for accompanied children in Italy is\nnot available, but their proportion is very low, representing only\n8% of children arriving through the Central Mediterranean Route\nbetween January and September 2017.\n\nAccompanied Children - Age Breakdown\n\n\n0 - 4 years 5 - 14 years 15 - 17 years\n\n\n##### Reception on Arrival in 2017*\n\nGreece\n\n- An estimated 19,000 children are in Greece. Of them,\n55% are in urban areas (apartments, hotels, shelters\nfor UASC, etc.), comparable to June 2017; 27% are in\naccommodation sites and 1% are in safe zones for UASC.\nA further 17% are in Reception and Identification Centresa 70% increase since June 2017.\n\n\n- In total, 228 unaccompanied children are in Reception and\nIdentification Centres and 106 are in protective custody/\ndetention (a slight increase since June 2017).\n\n\n- 1,096 UASC are in shelters for UASC, with an additional\n1,652 on the waiting list for shelter (a 36% increase since\nJune).\n\n\nItaly\n\n- 18,491 UASC are present in shelters for UASC, run by\nState authorities and nonprofit entities. This is only 4%\nmore compared to first half of 2017 (17,864), although\nthe number includes UASC who arrived in Italy both prior\nto and during 2017. 75% of the UASC in the shelters are\nbetween 15 and 17 years old.\n\n\nBulgaria\n\n- 482 children, including UASC, are accommodated in\nreception centres in Sofia and southern Bulgaria, a 35 %\ndecrease since June 2017 and almost three times less\ncompared to the same period in 2016.\n\n\n- All persons intercepted, including children and UASC,\ncontinue to be routinely detained until they claim asylum.\nDuring the third quarter of 2017, children spent an average\nof 7 days in detention before being transferred to a\nreception centre (down from 10 days during the second\nquarter of the year).\n\n\nSerbia\n\n- A total of 1,570 children are present in the country, almost\n987 less than in June 2017. Children comprise 41% of\nthe total number of refugees/migrants in the country,\n92% of whom are accommodated in state reception and\naccommodation centres, including 240 unaccompanied\nand separated children.\n\n\nHungary\n\n- Between January and September, Hungarian authorities\nadmitted 2,160 asylum seekers from Serbia through\nR\u00f6ske and Tompa transit zones. More than a half of all\nasylum seekers were children (54%).\n\n- On average, admitted asylum seekers stay for 35 days in\nthese closed type premises until they receive a decision\non their claim or decide to return voluntarily to Serbia.\n\nThe reception systems still vary greatly in quality across and\nwithin countries, sometimes even posing protection risks.\nThe large number of children who are not in shelters have\neither moved onwards or found themselves destitute on the\nstreets or in informal accommodation.\n\n\n- Figures reflect the situation as of end of September 2017\nSources: EKKA-Greece, UNICEF, Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Bulgaria State\nAgency for Refugees, Bulgarian Helsinki Committee\n\n\n\nGreece\n\n\n\n**33%** **47%** **20%**\n\n\n\nBulgaria **34%** **46%** **20%**\n\n\nSource: Hellenic Police, EKKA, Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees\n\n\nThe majority of UASC who arrived to Italy, Greece and Bulgaria\nbetween January and September 2017 were boys between 15\nand 17 years old (92% overall).\n\n\n\n3\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        2
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n\n##### Asylum Applications and Decisions\n\nBetween January and September 2017, European countries\nrecorded 161,087 asylum claims by children, including 56,717\nnewly registered asylum claims in Q3 2017. Children still make up\na third of all asylum seekers across Europe. Nationalities of child\nasylum seekers remain consistent with previous reports, as half\nof them came from just four countries: Syria (26%), Afghanistan\n(11%), Iraq (10%) and Eritrea (5%). Slightly over 40% of all asylumseeking children are girls.\n\n\nGermany continues to be the top destination for refugee and migrant\nchildren, registering over 40% of all child asylum applications in 2017\n(67,441 children). Almost 60% of them are young children between 0\nand 5 years old and another 11% (7,514) are UASC.\n\n\nOther countries that received large numbers of child asylum\nseekers in 2017 include Italy (16,077), Greece (14,465), France\n(14,085), Austria (9,310), Sweden (6,564), Spain (5,440), the\nUnited Kingdom (5,435) and Switzerland (5,050).\n\n\nCompared to the same period in 2016, however, the number\nof children applying for asylum in the top receiving destination\ncountries (Germany, Austria, the United Kingdom and Switzerland)\nis decreasing. At the same time, the number of asylum seeking\nchildren in Spain, Italy, France and Greece has marked a notable\nincrease. For example, the number of children seeking asylum\nin Spain during the third quarter of 2017 rose almost four times\ncompared to the same period in 2016, while Italy, France and\nGreece marked 60%, 12% and 5% increase respectively.\n\n\nAsylum Applications Lodged by Children, including\nUnaccompanied and Separated Children between January\nand September 2017 \u2013 by Country of Asylum*\n\n\nCHILDREN UASC\n\n\n\nREJECTED ASYLUM APPLICATIONS\n\n\nREFUGEE STATUS\n\n\n\nBetween January and September 2017, a total of 226,510\ndecisions on asylum claims by children have been issued. Of\nthem, 65% were positive and 35% rejected (proportion of type\nof decisions for Q3 is consistent with the first two quarters of\nthe 2017). Among children with positive decisions, 51% received\nrefugee status, 32% were granted subsidiary protection and 17%\nreceived humanitarian status.\n\n\nThe trend of granting subsidiary protection and humanitarian\nstatus continued in Q3 2017, particularly for children from Guinea,\nCote d'Ivoire and Bangladesh.\n\n\nMoreover, many children saw their asylum claims rejected,\nparticularly Pakistanis (73%), Nigerians (56%), Bangladeshis (38%),\nAfghans (32%), Iraqis (32%) and Syrians (4%) and Eritreans (5%).\n\n\nDecisions on Child Asylum Applications\n\n\n\nMain nationalities of arrivals\nin Greece\n\n4%\n\n\n1%\n\n\n\nMain nationalities of arrivals\nin Italy\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSUBSIDIARY PROTECTION\n\n\nHUMANITARIAN STATUS\n\n\n\n\n- The difference in numbers of arrivals and asylum applications can be explained by\nthe long waiting times before people can claim asylum, backlogs in national asylum\nsystems, as well as the fact that applications can be submitted by persons who have\narrived previously or did not necessarily come through the Mediterranean Routes.\n\n\n\n4\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        3
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n\n##### Relocation\n\nSince the launch of the Emergency Relocation Scheme, a total of\n29,635 refugees and migrants, including 9,840 children, benefited\nfrom relocation arrangements in Greece and Italy. Among them\nthere were only 380 UASC (329 from Greece and 51 from Italy).\n\n\nMost children relocated this year from Greece were transferred\nto Germany (23%), France (20%) and Sweden (8%) while children\nrelocated from Italy were transferred mainly to Germany (31%),\nthe Netherlands (14%), Switzerland (12%) and Sweden (11%).\n\n\nAlthough the number of relocated UASC remains low with just\n213 UASC benefitting from the scheme between January and\nSeptember 2017, this is 29% increase compared to the 166 UASC\nrelocated in the whole of 2016. During Q3 2017, most of UASC\nwere relocated to the Netherlands (86), Finland (30), Norway (22),\nBelgium (17), Switzerland (14) and Germany (10).\n\n\nGreece\n\n\nOut of the 20,368 [6] people, who were relocated from Greece to\nother EU Member States since October 2015, 8,929 (44%) were\nchildren, including 329 UASC. When looking at the dynamic of\nrelocations in 2017, the majority of transfers happened in the third\nquarter with 2,019 relocations taking place between July and\nSeptember this year. This represents a 9% increase compared\nto the second quarter, when 1,872 children were relocated, and\n15% increase compared to the period between January and\nMarch (1,761 relocations).\n\n\nADULTS\n\n**11,439**\n\n\nCHILDREN\n\n**8,929**\n\nUASC\n\n**329**\n\n\n\nItaly\n\nAs of September 2017, only 9,267 refugees and migrants were\nrelocated from Italy, including 911 children, out of whom 51 were\nUASC. In the third quarter of 2017, 238 children benefited from\nthe relocation scheme in Italy, which is more than the number of\nchildren relocated in 2015 and 2016 all together.\n\n\nTARGET\n\n**39,600**\n\n\nADULTS\n\n**8,356**\n\n\nUASC\n\n**51**\nCHILDREN\n\n**911**\n\n##### Returns from Greece to Turkey\n\n\nOf the total returnees (1,360) from Greece to Turkey under the\nEU-Turkey statement since the start of 2016 until end of October\n2017, 76 (5%) were children. All of them were returned with their\nfamilies.\n##### Assisted with Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR) to Children and UASC [7]\n\n\nBetween January and September 2017, IOM provided AVRR\nsupport to 55,577 migrants (25% less than the same period in\n2016). 25% of migrants availing AVRR support were children,\nincluding 4% UASC. Nearly 73% of the AVRR beneficiaries\nreturned from the European Economic Area and Switzerland.\nAmong these, more than 60% returned from Germany.\n\n\nWithin the same period, almost 12,900 migrants received\nassistance to return voluntarily from the European Economic Area\nand Switzerland. More than 27% of them were children, among\nwhom 2.5% were UASC.\n\n\nSource: Europe Resettlement 2016, UNHCR\n\n\n\n5\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        4
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  {
-    "input_text": "UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM January to September 2017\n\n\n##### Protection risks for children arriving to Europe\n\nCentral Mediterranean Route: children are at higher risk of\nbeing exploited during the journey compared to adults- 88%\nchildren vs. 75% adults responded positively to at least one\nhuman trafficking and other exploitative practices indicators from\nthe DTM\u00b4s Flow Monitoring Surveys conducted in Italy between\nApril and July 2017.\n\n\n- Average age of children who responded positively is 16,5 and they\nhave spent more than 6 months in transit before landing in Italy.\n\n\n- 93% of children who engaged in secondary migration, after\nspending more than a year in country different than their origin\ncountry, said they have experienced at least one situation\nwhich can indicate exposure to human trafficking and other\nexploitative practices.\n\n\n- 88% of interviewed children reported having experienced physical\nviolence of any sort during their journey, and another 32% reported\nwitnessing instances during their journey when someone travelling\nwith them has been threatened with sexual violence.\n\n##### Limitation of available data on Children and UASC:\n\n\nThere is no comprehensive data on arrivals (both adults\nand children) in Europe, especially by land and air, as such\nmovements are largely irregular and involve smuggling\nnetworks, which are difficult to track. If collected, data is rarely\ndisaggregated by nationalities, risk category, gender or age.\n\n\nReliable data on the number of UASC either arriving to, or\ncurrently residing in, different European countries is often\nunavailable. The number of asylum applications filed by\nUASC is used to provide an indication of trends but does not\nnecessarily provide an accurate picture of the caseload due\nto backlogs in national asylum systems, onward irregular\nmovements or not applying for asylum at all. In addition, due\nto different definitions and national procedures and practices,\ncollecting accurate data on separated children specifically is\nvery challenging (e.g. separated children being registered as\neither accompanied or unaccompanied). It should also be\nnoted that complete data for the period January to September\n2017 on children and UASC asylum applications for all EU\nmember states was not available on the Eurostat website at\nthe time when this factsheet was released.\n\n\nSources: Hellenic Police, Greek National Centre for Social Solidarity (EKKA), Italian Ministry of Interior, Bulgarian\nState Agency for Refugees, Spanish Ministry of Interior, Eurostat, BAMF-Germany, IOM, UNHCR and UNICEF\n\n\n\nEastern Mediterranean Route: 8,5% interviewed children who\narrived through this route responded positively to at least one of\nthe indicators related to human trafficking and other exploitative\npractices\n\n\n- Children reported travelling alone more often than adults, (56%\nvs. 37%), very often with scarce financial resources, which puts\nthem at particularly high risk hidden behind the cheaper but\nmore dangerous deals with mediators, often involving violent\nbehavior by smugglers or other travel companions.\n\n\n- Survey shows that travelling with a group of non-family\nmembers is associated with a higher share of positive\nresponses among children (12% compared to 8% of those who\ntravelled alone)\n\n\n- 11% of interviewed children reported being forcibly returned\nat least once after having tried to move on from the country\nwhere survey was conducted (the Former Yugoslav Republic\nof Macedonia, Greece, Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania,\nMontenegro, Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)\n\n\nSource: IOM Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) Flow Monitoring Surveys Analysis (FMS)\n\n\nEndnotes:\n\n1. Data on arrivals is partial due to the large scale of irregular movements and\n\nreflects only sea arrivals for Greece and Italy. Data for Spain include both sea\nand land arrivals.\n\n2. Separated children are children separated from both parents, or from their\n\nprevious legal or customary primary caregiver, but not necessarily from\nother relatives. These may, therefore, include children accompanied by other\nadult family members. Unaccompanied children are children who have been\nseparated from both parents and other relatives and are not being cared for by\nan adult who, by law or custom, is responsible for doing so. (IASC)\n\n3. Arrival figures for Greece are collected in the framework of UNHCR border\n\nactivities and are provided by Hellenic Coastguard and Hellenic Police.\n\n4. During the same period of time, a total of 8,987 referrals were made to the\n\nGreek National Centre for Social Solidarity (EKKA) based on children identified\non islands and mainland Greece, including near the land border with Turkey\nbetween Jan 2016 and Sept 2017. source\n\n5. During the same period of time, 905 children applied for asylum in Bulgaria,\n\nof which 370 were UASC. The higher number of asylum applications is due\nmainly to the fact that there is no systematic registration of people arriving in\nthe country, and some children may have claimed asylum in reception centres\nwithout being intercepted or identified by national law enforcement authorities\nat border crossing points or within the territory of the country.\n\n6. This number reflects all relocations since the launch of the EU relocation\n\nscheme in late 2015.\n\n7. The data provided here is provisional and should therefore be considered as\n\nan estimation.\n\n\nAbout the factsheet\n\n\nThis factsheet is jointly produced by UNHCR, UNICEF and IOM with the\naim to support evidence-based decision-making and advocacy on issues\nrelated to refugee and migrant children.\n\n\nThe document provides an overview of the situation in Europe with\nregards to refugee and migrant children (accompanied and UASC). It\ncompiles key child-related data based on available official sources: arrival,\nasylum applications, asylum decisions, profiling of arrivals, relocation from\nGreece and Italy under the EU relocation scheme, as well as returns from\nGreece to Turkey under the EU-Turkey statement.\n\n\nThe present factsheet covers the period January to September 2017\nand is produced on quarterly basis to provide up-to-date information on\nrefugee and migrant children, including unaccompanied and\nseparated children.\n\n\n\nFor further information or any\nquestions concerning this\nfactsheet please contact:\n\n\nUNICEF:\nTsvetomira Bidart\ntbidart@unicef.org\n\n\nJointly compiled and produced by:\n\n\n\nUNHCR:\nJaved Khan\nkhanjav@unhcr.org\n\n\nIOM:\nIvona Zakoska Todorovska\ndtmmediterranean@iom.int\n\n\n\n6\n\n\n",
-    "datasets": [
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "DTM\u00b4s Flow Monitoring Surveys",
-          "confidence": 0.5701265931129456,
-          "start": 63,
-          "end": 69
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": {
-          "text": "human trafficking and other exploitative practices indicators",
-          "confidence": 0.9691938161849976,
-          "start": 54,
-          "end": 61
-        },
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "DTM",
-          "confidence": 0.9204892516136169,
-          "start": 63,
-          "end": 64
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Italy",
-          "confidence": 0.9823984503746033,
-          "start": 71,
-          "end": 72
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.9384337067604065,
-          "start": 8,
-          "end": 9
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "available data on Children",
-          "confidence": 0.8441838622093201,
-          "start": 197,
-          "end": 201
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.8946205973625183,
-          "start": 218,
-          "end": 219
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "data on separated children",
-          "confidence": 0.6019494533538818,
-          "start": 344,
-          "end": 348
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "EU\nmember states",
-          "confidence": 0.7141129970550537,
-          "start": 391,
-          "end": 394
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.7424729466438293,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 383
-        },
-        "reference_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.6188514232635498,
-          "start": 382,
-          "end": 383
-        },
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "separated children",
-          "confidence": 0.8103577494621277,
-          "start": 346,
-          "end": 348
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "background"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.8471772074699402,
-          "start": 538,
-          "end": 539
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": {
-          "text": "Survey",
-          "confidence": 0.7590810656547546,
-          "start": 538,
-          "end": 539
-        },
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": null,
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "interviewed children",
-          "confidence": 0.5793161392211914,
-          "start": 458,
-          "end": 460
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "IOM Displacement Tracking Matrix",
-          "confidence": 0.9684445858001709,
-          "start": 625,
-          "end": 629
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "named",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "DTM",
-          "confidence": 0.9924443364143372,
-          "start": 630,
-          "end": 631
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.6660036444664001,
-          "start": 662,
-          "end": 663
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "Arrival figures for Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.907762885093689,
-          "start": 759,
-          "end": 763
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "descriptive",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": {
-          "text": "IASC",
-          "confidence": 0.717024028301239,
-          "start": 755,
-          "end": 756
-        },
-        "author": null,
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Greece",
-          "confidence": 0.6979222893714905,
-          "start": 762,
-          "end": 763
-        },
-        "publication_year": null,
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": null,
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      },
-      {
-        "dataset_name": {
-          "text": "EU relocation\n\nscheme",
-          "confidence": 0.8655125498771667,
-          "start": 928,
-          "end": 931
-        },
-        "dataset_tag": "vague",
-        "description": null,
-        "data_type": null,
-        "acronym": null,
-        "author": {
-          "text": "UNHCR",
-          "confidence": 0.7181416153907776,
-          "start": 961,
-          "end": 962
-        },
-        "producer": null,
-        "geography": {
-          "text": "Europe",
-          "confidence": 0.7972182035446167,
-          "start": 993,
-          "end": 994
-        },
-        "publication_year": {
-          "text": "2017",
-          "confidence": 0.6642413139343262,
-          "start": 1063,
-          "end": 1064
-        },
-        "reference_year": null,
-        "reference_population": {
-          "text": "refugee and migrant children",
-          "confidence": 0.9570809602737427,
-          "start": 979,
-          "end": 983
-        },
-        "is_used": "False",
-        "usage_context": "supporting"
-      }
-    ],
-    "document": {
-      "source": "https://reliefweb.int/attachments/a676e78d-f193-3d45-a40a-3f797135051a/61915.pdf",
-      "pages": [
-        5
-      ]
-    }
-  }
-]