Amid systemic disruption and the unraveling of traditional aid paradigms, a transformative form of leadership is emerging from the Global South. Rooted in Indigenous knowledge, communal values, and contextual intelligence, this leadership model challenges entrenched power asymmetries and redefines humanitarian effectiveness. It does not seek to replicate Northern models, but instead cultivates authentic, regionally grounded responses shaped by collective wisdom and mutual accountability. This new leadership embraces complexity, fosters North-South symbiosis, and prepares for an increasingly multipolar humanitarian landscape. In doing so, it offers not only adaptation—but the foundation for a more just, inclusive, and sustainable future for humanitarian action.
OpenStreetMap emerges as a crucial tool in addressing the humanitarian crisis in Sudan, where traditional aid efforts overlook peripheral communities and critical infrastructure remains unmapped. Hernández highlights how this participatory mapping platform can help bridge visibility gaps, allowing local actors to contribute vital geographic data. The article envisions four possible futures shaped by the intensity of conflict and access to open mapping tools: (1) High conflict with minimal access leads to continued invisibility of rural communities; (2) Low conflict with limited access risks long-term neglect of peripheral areas; (3) High conflict with ample access could enhance response coordination despite violence; and (4) Low conflict with broad mapping use enables inclusive recovery.
In light of recent geopolitical shifts, the humanitarian sector is experiencing significant changes. The « To Each Their Playing Field » scenario from The Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030 report anticipates a fragmented humanitarian landscape, with decentralized responses and diverse actors beyond traditional INGOs. To remain relevant, INGOs must accelerate localization efforts, empowering regional partners and redefining their value propositions. This transformation is crucial to effectively navigate the complexities of a multipolar world and continue delivering impactful humanitarian assistance.
Building on the success of the Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030 report, IARAN and CHL start the launching of this new study to explore transformative pathways for aid by 2040. With a focus on digitalization, disaster resilience, and decolonizing aid, the project will provide foresight scenarios and a toolkit for systemic transformation. Guided by a dedicated Steering Committee and using methodologies like La Prospective and Causal Layered Analysis, it empowers actors to navigate change collaboratively.
Two years of huge emergency after huge emergency - from the Covid-19 pandemic’s various variants to evacuations from Afghanistan and a series of storms battering the UK - our people are tired, yet the need for humanitarian aid continues to grow. And then the Ukraine crisis boiled over.
We have always struggled to plan for the many uncertainties the future may bring, but the massive disruptions of the last couple of years made us realise that grappling with uncertainty is not an option.
The British Red Cross’s Strategic Insight and Foresight team has been developing a way to rapidly construct scenarios about the future, helping our teams get a sense of likely people’s short-term and longer-term humanitarian needs, as well as the potential ripple effects caused by a crisis.
Whilst multilateral reform and changing the current models of humanitarian financing are ultimately what is needed for systemic change, every agency could adjust the way that it develops programmes- and this small change has the potential to transform aid. Designing and delivering aid programs is a core function of most humanitarian organizations and therefore it is in the process that all humanitarian aid sectors needs to revisit to begin their equity-based, decolonial journey.
Universities and research centers are important, non-traditional, humanitarian actors that actively participate in knowledge production and cadre formation for the sector, with a preponderance of global North institutions over the ones from the South.
There are, at least, three areas of opportunity for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the global North to engage productively with the principles and objectives of the Grand Bargain proposed during the World Humanitarian Summit of 2016, so that humanitarian knowledge production can also jump into the “localization” wagon:
Are you unsure about how technology may be able to help you to achieve your humanitarian sector objectives? Do you want to understand where emerging and existing technologies can assist people that are in need?
Matt Twilley would like to share with you some of his experiences and open up some ideas on how potentially the use of technology in the right way can give you more opportunity to really help those in need.
Acabar con los encierros es, como lo define Paul Watzlawick, “una ultra-solución”: un intento de arreglar un problema deshaciéndose de todo lo que tenga que ver con el mismo. Al caer en esta trampa, los gobiernos están utilizando la ultra-solución, arriesgándose a destruir tanto la economía, como la vida de las personas al final del túnel.
L’homophobie est entendue comme les discriminations de tous ordres à l’encontre des personnes LGBT (lesbiennes, gays, bisexuelles et transgenres). Si «l’homophobie politique» est déjà connue en tant qu’outil de duplicité en politique intérieure, Michel Maietta explore davantage son pouvoir de manipulation, jusqu’à sa dimension géopolitique. L’auteur nous rappelle à quel point la protection des droits des personnes LGBT revêt une importance stratégique dans la défense plus large des droits de l’homme.
In this piece Leonie reflects on a workshop which she attended in mid-June where she spent 3 days with the IARAN fellows: a group of humanitarian professionals with expertise that spans urban planning and UK asylum law to GIS and social entrepreneurship. They discussed how each of them, in their separate organisations can bring change to the humanitarian sector, for the better.
Many have said it before: localisation needs to stop being a talking point and start being a reality. But we have been saying this since the advent of capacity building. So do we really mean it? If so, how can we bring about localised change effectively, and swiftly?
Why localisation is no longer an 'if', but firmly, a 'when'.
The last century has been characterised by the advancement and spread of technology. The reach and adoption, particularly of information and communication technology (ICT) saw a sharp rise in the 1990s and has grown exponentially since. Leonie LeBorgne and Matthew Williams ask: are Aid Organisations ready to respond to a growing and dangerous digital divide?
With problems on the rise ‘at home’, criticism of foreign aid is stronger than ever. At the same time, humanitarian needs are growing, and far outpacing the funding requirements and government commitments needed to address the short- and long-term consequences of crises. What lies in store for aid organisations?
Depuis une décennie, les besoins humanitaires ne cessent d’évoluer, s’intensifiant et se complexifiant. En 2015, selon l’UNHCR, 65.3 millions de personnes étaient déplacées. Parmi celles-ci, 21.3 millions sont des réfugiés au titre de la convention de 1951 et la très grande majorité d’entre eux le sont dans un pays voisin. Seule une minorité de 6% sont accueillis en Europe. Malgré cette faible proportion, la crise migratoire à laquelle est confrontée l’Europe depuis 2014 a contribué à mettre en avant les fragilités du système humanitaire traditionnel.
$1 spent in preparedness saves $7 in humanitarian response (1). Humanitarians working in disaster preparedness, early warning, and resilience building have all heard this before. Though it may satisfy public and private donors for reasons of accountability and a no-regrets approach to programming, we need to push past this statistic. What is the true value of pre-empting the future when working in humanitarian response?
