A/HRC/23/44 and resources of IDW should be fully recognized and more systematically supported. This entails rectifying the “pervasive biases”, which, as the Secretary-General has highlighted, result in resources for initiatives such as post-conflict livelihoods programmes being directed “overwhelmingly towards men”.54 Livelihood programmes for IDW should further be designed to be safe and sustainable, and protect women against unintended protection consequences, including elevated risks of SGBV. 7. Enhancing gender-sensitive approaches to durable solutions 48. The pursuit of durable solutions raises a range of concerns for IDW. Although the choice of a durable solution is, in principle, an individual matter, in practice decisions concerning durable solutions are usually made by families or communities, often marginalizing women’s preferences. For example, particularly when they have been the targets of SGBV, IDW may be deterred from returning due to traumatic associations or fear of further attacks.55 Yet, in some instances families or other actors may pressure women to return despite these concerns. 49. Moreover, experiences of crisis, conflict and displacement often challenge existing notions of gender. While uprooted, many women take on new roles as leaders and breadwinners, which they sustain after displacement by, for example, developing new businesses and promoting peaceful coexistence at the grassroots level. However, many women struggle to preserve these advances upon return or resettlement, as they are often pressured to revert to traditional gender roles. Such changed gender roles can lead to increased incidents of domestic violence, particularly when men return to their families and communities and are not able to resume their traditional roles as breadwinners and head of the family. Hence, the importance of actively engaging men in order to achieve equitable humanitarian assistance and enhancing IDW participation and protection. Additionally, displaced and returnee women may be disadvantaged with regard to housing rights, be unable to gain security of tenure, and are often marginalized in the negotiation of land claims.56 Those with disabilities may also face particular obstacles to accessing durable solutions, including extreme marginalization in decision-making processes, lack of appropriate transportation and inadequate services and pervasive discrimination in return and resettlement communities.57 50. Overall, the Special Rapporteur notes that discussions of gender issues within host and return communities and how particular durable solutions can backstop protection for IDW remain relatively nascent. Addressing them requires more concerted attention, as well as cooperation between humanitarian and development actors. The piloting of the Secretary-General’s 2011 Framework for Ending Displacement in the Aftermath of Conflict represents an important opportunity to strengthen attention to the particular rights, needs and concerns of IDW in the pursuit of durable solutions. 54 55 56 57 A/65/354-S/2010/466, para. 49. Integrated Regional Information Networks, “Nigeria: Boko Haram displaced fear returning home”, 19 January 2012. Jacquie Kiggundu, Brookings-Bern Project, “IDP Return Processes and Customary Land Tenure”, speech to the Overseas Development Institute, London, 7 February 2008. Human Rights Watch, “As If We Weren’t Human”: Discrimination and Violence against Women with Disabilities in Northern Uganda (2010); HelpAge and IDMC, The neglected generation: the impact of displacement on older people (2012). 17