Jerusalem
The hardest permanent-status question — sovereignty, the holy sites, and a shared city that has to work for two peoples.
Jerusalem is where the conflict is at its most symbolic — and its most practical.
Every permanent-status framework has foundered on the same question: how to share a city that both peoples claim as a capital, while keeping its holy sites stable and its residents' daily lives functional.
ECF's approach separates the symbolic from the administrable. We document how the city actually works — municipal services, residency, access — and we model arrangements under which two capitals could coexist without partitioning daily life into dysfunction.
Nowhere is our commitment to measurement clearer than at the holy sites. Our Temple Mount Status Quo Monitor turns the most charged question of all into a transparent, continuously updated evidence base — open to everyone.
Indicative planning figures compiled by ECF from public sources, 2026. Provided for orientation; consult primary data before citation.
A city, made administrable.
Our Jerusalem work concentrates on turning the most symbolic file into workable arrangements.
The holy sites & the status quo
Independent, trilingual measurement of conditions at the holy sites — anchored by the Status Quo Monitor.
Two capitals
Modelling sovereignty and administrative arrangements under which two capitals could function in one city.
Residency & daily life
Documenting services, access and residency so any settlement protects the city's everyday functioning.
The Temple Mount Status Quo Monitor
The clearest taste of how we work on Jerusalem: a continuously updated, trilingual index that turns a charged debate into a transparent evidence base.
Open the Monitor →The team on Jerusalem.
Name Surname
Leads ECF's Jerusalem file and the status-quo question.
Name Surname
Specialist in municipal administration and residency.
Name Surname
Maintains the Temple Mount Status Quo Monitor.
