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.
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?
The growth in the humanitarian sector to include private companies as partners and implementers challenges the notion that organizations working in the humanitarian sector must be driven by the humanitarian imperative alone. The inclusion of commercial firms whose fundamental purpose is to make a profit necessitates an examination of the consequences when the humanitarian imperative is but one of many motivations.
In an effort to gain a deeper understanding of the practical realities that either foster or inhibit participation and the assumptions that underscore “capacity development” approaches, this paper examines a capacity development approach that was co-designed by the Regional Humanitarian Analyst at Save the Children East Africa Regional Office and the Project Director for the IRC-UoN Partnership for Education in Emergencies.
