Beyond the traditional humanitarian aid model
- 1. Classical and resilience humanitarianism. IDS – 22 May 2018 Dorothea Hilhorst @hilhorst_thea
- 2. A tale of two pities and the anthropological gaze • The classical aid paradigm • The shift to resilience • Revisiting the paradigms with an anthropological reality check
- 3. Classic humanitarian aid paradigm • Grounded in exceptionalism • Centred on international aid machinery • Rooted in principles
- 4. Exceptionalism • A strict separation between crisis and normality is deeply engrained in legal and cultural norms worldwide. • Humanitarian aid temporary stop-gap for needs triggered by a specific crisis (Calhoun 2010). • Exceptionalism as the major organising principle of classic humanitarianism: backbone of many of the properties of aid including its short-cycle funding modalities and expensive operating procedures. • Determines representation of self: aid agency as isolated from society, lonely cowboy
- 5. Humanitarian system UN ICRC/ IFRC INGOs OCHA IASC SCHR UNDP OXFAM WFP WorldVision UNHCR Caritas IOM Act UNICEF Save the Children FAO Lutheran World Federation • Local actors: not in the organogram – or a small box at the bottom • Quality agencies to oil the machinery: ALNAP, Core Humanitarian Standard, Sphere standard etc.etc.
- 6. Humanitarian principles Humanity: The desire to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it may be found… to protect life and health and to ensure respect for the human being. Impartiality: Provision of humanitarian assistance must be impartial and not based on nationality, race, religion, or political point of view. It must be based on need alone Neutrality: Not to take sides in hostilities or engage at any time in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature Independence: Humanitarian agencies must formulate and implement their own policies independently of government policies or actions.
- 7. Small selection of issues, among many more • Donor dependency high: who pays the piper calls the tune: Most agencies more than 50% and upto 100% dependent on donors • Geo-political interest partly determine aid flows (security, migration) • International military interventions (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia etc.) • Rebel/ authority diversion of aid • Recipient manipulation of aid • Self-interest by humanitarian agencies, competition
- 8. Critiques since the 1990s • Lack of accountability • Dysfunctional procedures • Undignified response • Lack of linkages to development Listening project; LRRD; Standards Recurrent but within the classical paradigm.
- 9. Shift to resilience humanitarianism Starting with socio-natural disasters (Hyogo Framework for Action 2004) Now spilling over to refugee care and other domains of humanitarian aid: • World Humanitarian Summit of 2016: bridge humanitarian action to development and to peacebuilding and the resolution of crisis (Ban Ki-moon 2016). • World Bank: refugee care is a development issue (Betts and Collier)
- 10. Resilience: breaking through exceptionalism! Resilience paradigm: people, communities and societies (can) have the capacities to adapt to or spring back from tragic life events and disasters. Disaster, rather than a total and immobilizing disruption, becomes an event where people seek continuity by using their resources to adapt. Crisis is the new normality: The new normal of protracted crisis Living with the floods People as survivors and first responders
- 11. Changing roles Profound changes to humanitarian governance Impact on core relation of assistance. Beneficiary/ benefactor mutual compact that both parties depend on: Victimcy versus Ignorancy
- 12. Real change? • Definitely a change in story that aid tells about itself • Grounded in Syrian refugee crises: lower middle class countries No camps!!! • More structurally enabled by technology
- 13. Critique on resilience paradigm • Shifts responsibility • Disinterests international community • Politics of abandonment Example: refugees versus migrants refugees as part of precariat
- 14. Classic humanitarianism Resilience humanitarianism Keyword Humanitarian system Humanitarian ecosystem Scope Humanitarian space is operating environment for humanitarian action in which humanitarians work according to the principles of neutrality, impartiality and humanity Interventions as open space where different actors operate Humanitar ian crisis State of exception, separated from normality Crisis as the new normality Refugee camp is a relic of modernity Humanitar ian needs Needs are triggered by the crisis. Needs are offset against capacities and resilience Who provides aid? International humanitarian agencies central in determining aid Renewed attention to national and local authorities as responsible service providers More systematic attention to ‘other’ providers such as private sector, new humanitarians, local services Humanitar ian action Projects defined according to humanitarian principles Aid primarily facilitates resilience building, engagement with advocacy to aid communities seeking services Internation al humanitari ans Driven by their principles, although evaluations observe they deviate in practice Seeking to apply principles in contextual way Seeking bridges with development and peacebuilding Local institution s Either spoilers and causes of crises or in need of capacity-building by international community. Foregrounded in localization rhetoric, practice continued emphasis on need for capacity building Aid recipients Victims or cheats Survivors and first responders Active and resilient
- 15. Radically different stories, but complementary? Importance of type of crisis: • Classical humanitarianism modelled on high-intensity conflict • Resilience humanitarianism modelled on socio-natural disaster, now refugee care and fragile settings
- 16. Arena perspective: multiple realities Classical and resilience humanitarianism both selectively highlighting one face of multiple and complex reality Humanitarian arena: • Socially negotiating actors • Central concept: the notion of agency • Importance of everyday politics: emerging realities
- 17. Multi-faceted realities • Crisis both continuity and exceptionality • Institutions both geared to conflict and peace • People can be victim as well have agency Both paradigms foreground particular aspects
- 18. Many questions to be raised How is power enacted? How do actors respond to the multifaceted nature of institutions? Where are the cognitive dissonances between new ideas of humanitarians and old habits that may not disappear? How do crisis-affected populations interpret this information and strategize to seek the services they require? How do aid agencies affect the realities in which they operate? How to protect people while respecting their dignity, initiative and agency!
- 19. Advertising • 27-29 August Humanitarian studies conference the Hague: www.ihsa.info • New blog on global development and social justice www.issblog.nl
Editor's Notes
- #21: 20