Sure, thank you very much.
Absolutely, the context of where the conflicts are is important to understand. The infrastructure, I'm very happy that you highlighted that. I've worked in South Sudan before in rural areas. There are no roads and very little other types of infrastructure. Economic infrastructure isn't there. You can tell that this is having a huge impact, whether or not there is conflict.
I would say that the point made of focusing on infrastructure or other development issues in order to permit humanitarian aid is a wise one and should be dealt with together. This is where we talk about nexus issues, meeting the humanitarian-development nexus. We understand that in order to have a humanitarian impact, we have to have some of that critical infrastructure in place. If we're talking about doing a water and hygiene response in an emergency, we are saving lives and that is critical, but we're not dealing with the long-standing structural issues that are there that have a large impact on the ability to access those in need.
I would say that we shouldn't be looking at one over the other, but looking at both of them at the same time. Oftentimes this is the case. We do see that organizations like Oxfam have both humanitarian and development programming at the exact same time, sometimes in the same area, because we understand that band-aid solutions aren't enough and that we need to go a little bit deeper and support some of those structural issues. That can come in the form of building roads or delivering more on the water infrastructure systems in order to have more of a long-term impact.