[{"bbox": [96, 152, 1131, 207], "category": "Text", "text": "reducing economic, social and environmental inequalities. It promotes the full participation in the economic rights of the most vulnerable and provide an opportunity to reduce inequalities among the targeted groups."}, {"bbox": [96, 237, 209, 263], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## Democracy"}, {"bbox": [96, 264, 1131, 394], "category": "Text", "text": "The focus of this Action is on improving governance across the three intervention areas by strengthening the advocacy capacities of civil society and local communities. This contributes to increasing the compromised legitimacy of the state. At the same time, effective service delivery, contributes to improving social cohesion. Supporting the Iraqi authorities' capacity to improve service delivery for its population, including the most vulnerable one, is crucial to advance reconciliation and stabilisation."}, {"bbox": [96, 426, 485, 454], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## Conflict sensitivity, peace and resilience"}, {"bbox": [96, 455, 1131, 746], "category": "Text", "text": "Water scarcity and environmental degradation have become drivers of conflict in Iraq. They lead to increased dissatisfaction with the Government of Iraq with the potential to trigger large-scale protests (as it has happened in recent past). Iraq faces a multifaceted and persistent water crisis that might have implications at the humanitarian, economic, security and social levels, including population movements. Water scarcity and environmental degradation are also instrumentalised and weaponised in conflict. Non state armed groups have for instance relied on supply of water (and food) to increase the legitimacy of their governance. Military tactics of scorched earth are applied on an ethno-sectarian basis and risk leading to violence and radicalisation. For these reasons, conflict sensitivity and a people-centred approach underpin this Action, addressing the root causes of conflicts while social cohesion is mainstreamed throughout. Equally, the Action centrally builds on the findings of the conflict analysis screening for Iraq that identified underlying conflict drivers/triggers and provided a series of recommendation for conflict sensitivity and identified specific peace-building opportunities."}, {"bbox": [96, 758, 1131, 971], "category": "Text", "text": "In terms of peace-building opportunities, this Action directly contributes to three objectives notably 1. Increased investments in green and sustainable agriculture and forestry; 2. Enhanced delivery of municipal services including water and sanitation management; 3. Improved transparency, accountability, and credibility of the judicial system, and specifically the Empowerment of women. All relevant recommendations for conflict sensitivity mitigation measures relating to the themes of Reinforcing a highly corrupt, underperforming, contested political system; Exacerbating inter-group rivalries; Fuelling the negative perception of international support to Iraq; Sector- and action-specific risks are taken into account for this Action and are fully integrated into the design of the programmes."}, {"bbox": [96, 975, 335, 999], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## Disaster Risk Reduction"}, {"bbox": [96, 1002, 1131, 1134], "category": "Text", "text": "The Action aims to improve the shock resilience of national systems and thus contributes to disaster risk reduction at country level. The Action specifically aims to improve the shock-responsiveness and the ability of the Iraqi agri-food labour market, water management systems, and judicial systems to expand and taper assistance in response to the onset and abatement of crises. Through the planned interventions, the Action equally strengthens the resilience of individuals, households and communities who are all key stakeholders of the Action."}, {"bbox": [85, 1155, 422, 1182], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## 3.4 Risks and Lessons Learnt"}, {"bbox": [82, 1195, 1167, 1571], "category": "Table", "text": "<table><thead><tr><td>Category</td><td>Risks</td><td>Likelihood (High / Medium / Low)</td><td>Impact (High / Medium / Low)</td><td>Mitigating measures</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan=\"4\">External environment</td><td>Risk 1: A worsening security situation</td><td>High</td><td>Medium</td><td>Political dialogue by the EU (including European Union Advisory Mission (EUAM)) and EU Member States</td></tr><tr><td>Risk 2: An increasingly unstable political situation</td><td>High</td><td>Medium</td><td>Political dialogue / support to elections by the EU and EU Member States</td></tr><tr><td>Risk 3: Increased access constraints for partners</td><td>High</td><td>Medium</td><td>Political outreach and choice of implementation partners</td></tr><tr><td>Risk 4: Increasing climate vulnerability and environmental degradation risks</td><td>High</td><td>Medium</td><td>Political dialogue by the EU and EU Member States</td></tr></tbody></table>"}, {"bbox": [1027, 1681, 1141, 1705], "category": "Page-footer", "text": "Page 17 of 30"}]