A growing body of evidence shows that good environmental practices and responsible natural resource management are important foundations for re-establishing livelihoods, reducing vulnerability, and improving human security in the aftermath of a crisis. But too often, respondents fail to use existing appraisal and impact-assessment tools promptly, needs assessments struggle to incorporate environmental analysis effectively, and conflict-sensitivity trainings and programming lack environmental content. One barrier to more effective performance is the misperception that good environmental management in crisis response and recovery is excessively costly in time or money, or that it is not part of the core mission of helping people. Other identified barriers include the need to mobilize the right type of evidence more effectively, discontinuities in the ‘relief-to-development’ continuum, and a lack of organizational commitment and capacity.
