As international debates once again turn to Gaza’s reconstruction, a growing number of planners, scholars and practitioners are warning that merely rebuilding homes and infrastructure will not heal communities shattered by decades of conflict. “Gaza: A Vision of Hope,” a new report by the Anthedon initiative, argues that Gaza’s recovery must begin not with cement and master plans, but with people, memory and social cohesion.

The report, released in late December, was developed in partnership with Heritopolis and the Metropolis network under UN-Habitat’s University Network Initiative. It offers a fundamentally different framework for postwar recovery. It frames Gaza’s devastation not only as a humanitarian emergency but as the cumulative outcome of political fragmentation, prolonged siege and repeated cycles of destruction that have eroded both the physical city and its social fabric.

Rather than proposing a conventional reconstruction blueprint, the report challenges donor-driven models that prioritize speed, scale and visibility over long-term resilience. “Technical rebuilding detached from human context risks reproducing fragmentation and vulnerability,” the authors argue. Roads, housing blocks and utilities may be restored, but without addressing trauma, displacement and the loss of collective identity, Gaza remains deeply fragile.

Francesco Bandarin, special adviser to the director-general of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property and a former director of the UNESCO World Heritage Center, argues that “the scale of destruction in Gaza represents one of the greatest reconstruction challenges in modern human history — in terms of physical damage, financial needs and the complexity of operating under ongoing military control.”

He added: “Large-scale reconstruction plans for Gaza are simply not feasible in the absence of a political peace process. With Israel’s direct occupation of more than 60 percent of the Gaza Strip, comprehensive urban planning, major infrastructure projects and long-term economic investments are structurally blocked.”

Bandarin concluded that rebuilding Gaza will not succeed without a credible peace framework supported by key regional actors, particularly Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, alongside genuine international guarantees.

A similar sentiment is reflected in the words of Rami Nasrallah, the founder of the International Peace and Cooperation Center. Nasrallah believes that reconstruction is estimated to require more than $100 billion, yet there is no international commitment to mobilize such resources. “Beyond emergency humanitarian assistance, donors remain reluctant amid deep uncertainty over the future of Gaza and the broader Palestinian landscape, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem.”

Externally imposed master plans and megaprojects often overlook local realities and exclude those most affected.

Daoud Kuttab


He emphasized that “communities in Gaza cannot and will not wait for donors, political agreements or large-scale interventions that may never materialize.” Notably, he observed that “recovery is already happening on the ground. Palestinians are rebuilding shelters, markets and learning spaces using local and recycled materials, responding creatively to the severe shortage of construction supplies and equipment.”

The Jerusalem-based professor pointed out that “locally driven reconstruction is not merely about survival. It is strengthening collective problem-solving, social cohesion and resilience — proving that even in the face of widespread destruction and siege, communities are reclaiming their future.”

At the heart of the vision is the understanding that recovery is fundamentally a social and cultural process. The Anthedon initiative places collective memory at the center of rebuilding — not as nostalgia for a lost past but as a means of reconnecting communities with their shared identity and sense of belonging. Historic neighborhoods, markets, mosques, schools and public spaces are described as anchors of everyday life that once sustained social ties and resilience. Their restoration, the report suggests, is essential to rebuilding trust and civic life alongside physical infrastructure.

Participation is another cornerstone of the proposed approach. The report insists that Gazans, particularly youth, women, community activists, local authorities and professional groups, must be the primary actors shaping their own recovery. Externally imposed master plans and megaprojects often overlook local realities and exclude those most affected by the destruction. Instead, it calls for a grassroots-driven process that brings together local government, civil society, academic institutions and traditional community structures to co-design neighborhoods, revive livelihoods and rebuild institutions.

This participatory model links reconstruction directly to civic renewal. Schools, community centers, cultural venues and public spaces are envisioned not only as sites of service provision but as places for healing, remembrance and the restoration of social bonds. In a context marked by profound trauma and loss, the report argues that psychological and social recovery must be addressed with the same urgency as physical damage.

Heritage preservation plays a central role in this vision. Archaeological sites, historic districts and traditional architecture are not treated as luxuries to be addressed later but as drivers of social cohesion and economic regeneration. By protecting and reactivating cultural heritage, the report suggests, Gaza can generate livelihoods, strengthen local identity and reinforce continuity in the face of repeated rupture.

Beyond the Strip itself, “Gaza: A Vision of Hope” situates recovery within a broader regional and political framework. It reaffirms Gaza’s place within a future Palestinian state and recalls its historical role as a Mediterranean hub of trade and exchange. Long-term stability, the report argues, depends on reconnecting Gaza with the West Bank and integrating it into wider regional networks involving Egypt, Jordan, Israel and beyond — through shared infrastructure, environmental cooperation and economic partnerships.

Yet the authors stress that regional integration cannot be imposed from above. Trust-building must begin locally, through inclusive governance and community empowerment. Only then can broader cooperation contribute to peace and shared prosperity, rather than deepen dependency or inequality.

Perhaps the report’s most pointed message is directed at the international community. It calls on donors and institutions to rethink their role, requiring a shift from control to partnership and from short-term projects to long-term capacity building. True recovery, it argues, cannot be imported. It must grow from within Gaza’s own society, supported by international solidarity rather than dictated by it.

Ultimately, “Gaza: A Vision of Hope” offers a sobering yet hopeful lesson: cities do not recover simply by rebuilding structures. They recover by restoring dignity, belonging and agency. Gaza’s reconstruction, the report concludes, must be a process of reconnection, between people and place, memory and future, if it is to lead not only to survival but to resilience and peace.

• Daoud Kuttab is an award-winning Palestinian journalist and former Ferris Professor of Journalism at Princeton University. He is the author of “State of Palestine Now: Practical and Logical Arguments for the Best Way to Bring Peace to the Middle East.” X: @daoudkuttab