What is humanitarianism and humanitarian aid?
- Page updated onJune 17, 2026
What is humanitarianism? And what does humanitarian aid entail? What are its objectives and purpose? Grounded in the same ethical foundation and rooted in the principle of humanity, the humanitarian imperative, and respect for the rights of people affected by disasters and humanitarian emergencies, various interpretations of humanitarian aid have emerged.
Classical humanitarian aid, throughout its history and evolution, has transformed and adapted to complex humanitarian crises and shifting geopolitical contexts. Today, however, while some of its characteristics remain relevant more than a century after its origins, there is a growing call for humanitarian aid to break away from its colonial past and adapt to new realities.
Table of contents:
Humanitarianism is a radical commitment to life and rights
The ideology of humanitarianism provides the ethical basis for humanitarian aid
Humanitarianism is an ideology based on the principle of humanity: all human lives are of equal worth (Sphere Association, 2018). It is therefore essential to act to assist people who are suffering and to protect their dignity and rights (Mosel & Holloway, 2019). This approach, however, clashes with the way in which the world order tolerates and accepts as valid the continuous atrocities that result in the elimination of part of the population, as a collateral effect of civilisation and its advances.
The proposal of humanitarianism is an unconditional ideological commitment to helping those whom the system leaves behind (Weissman, 2003). It takes the side of the victims of conflict, injustice, inequality and indifference. It is on this theoretical basis that the principles of humanitarian action are built. The ethical foundation of humanitarianism justifies intervening with humanitarian action in the midst of violence, chaos and hunger, wherever society and politics fail to protect human lives.
Humanitarian action is a way of applying and operationalising the principles of humanitarianism (Aloudat & Khan, 2022). This way of expressing humanitarianism is based on actions and interventions that pursue the humanitarian imperative.
What is the humanitarian imperative?
The humanitarian imperative establishes the obligation to act to prevent and alleviate human suffering caused by disasters or armed conflicts (Sphere Association, 2018). Based on humanitarianism, it is a fundamental ethical principle in international humanitarian law.
The humanitarian imperative is reflected in the Humanitarian Charter, drafted in 1997 by professionals from multiple humanitarian organisations who brought together the consensus of them all. This document does not merely view humanitarian assistance as an act of charity, but rather expresses the conviction that all people affected by a disaster or conflict have the right to receive humanitarian assistance and protection. In response to this right, the international community has a duty to act (Sphere Association, 2018).
Humanitarianism and human rights in humanitarian emergencies
Humanitarianism does not focus solely on the immediate relief of specific needs, but also recognises the rights of people affected by a disaster or humanitarian emergency (Slim, 2000). These rights are enshrined in numerous provisions of international humanitarian law, human rights law and refugee law. They can be summarised in three: the right to live with dignity, the right to receive humanitarian assistance, and the right to protection and security (Sphere Association, 2018).
The right to live with dignity
This right includes the right to life itself, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to an adequate standard of living. Dignity also requires respect for individuals and communities, as well as for their values, beliefs and human rights.
To uphold this right, humanitarian action must strive to listen to and try to understand what people affected by a complex humanitarian crisis have to say, and be open to their participation (Poole, 2025). Furthermore, and in line with the Core Humanitarian Standard, humanitarian action must place people as active agents at its centre (Mosel & Holloway, 2019), being transparent in its communication with them, fair in its treatment, accountable to its humanitarian imperative and principles, and respectful of the value that each human being holds by virtue of being a person.
The right to receive humanitarian assistance
Sometimes, humanitarian assistance is essential to ensure the right to live in dignity. In such cases, humanitarian aid is the only viable means of ensuring that people affected by a humanitarian crisis have access to sufficient and quality food and water, adequate shelter, and the resources needed to maintain their health. Therefore, when a state is unable to guarantee the right to live with dignity for its population, it must allow other humanitarian actors access, in accordance with the principle of impartiality and without any form of discrimination.
This right is frequently threatened in conflicts and complex crises by the effect of geopolitical interests. For example, States may prioritise certain contexts over others for humanitarian assistance according to their own agenda and strategic priorities, rather than the needs of the people affected (Fox, 2001). Moreover, the parties involved in a conflict may also limit the humanitarian access of organisations they find inconvenient, instrumentalise humanitarian aid, and even use humanitarian language to justify military interventions for which this right is, at best, secondary and incidental (Fassin, 2007).
The right to protection and security
Protection from violence and threats to life may be particularly important for refugees and internally displaced persons. When this need exceeds the capacity of a country, it must also seek international humanitarian assistance.
In relation to this, humanitarian actors have agreed to play a number of roles articulated in four protection principles. These principles are intimately related to the rights of the people that humanitarian aid helps to uphold, the humanitarian principles, and the Core Humanitarian Standard for quality and accountability.
🧠 Let's pause and reflect
In what specific situations in humanitarian action can guaranteeing rights come into tension with responding effectively to immediate needs, and how should this decision be guided?
- Think and write your answer.
- Click on «Copy and open».
- Paste to receive feedback.
📚 This is the NotebookLM for this topic. It uses only carefully selected references. | What is NotebookLM?
From classical to modern humanitarian action: evolution and tensions
The ethical foundation of humanitarianism is the starting point for the application of many ways of understanding humanitarian action. Drawing on the analysis of its successes and failures, the experience of its contradictions and the continuous adaptation to the humanitarian contexts and challenges it encounters along the way, humanitarian action is continually transformed (Weissman, 2003).
It would be simplistic, however, to think that transformation is merely an improvement. It is often a reaction to a financial or legitimacy crisis, or an attempt that fails owing to strong internal resistance and ends up revealing enormous contradictions (Fassin, 2007).
Likewise, there is no single form of humanitarian action (Fox, 2001). There are many, as many as the multiple directions in which humanitarian action has evolved throughout its history, as well as according to the organisational culture and vision of the different humanitarian actors, which are living entities, undergo changes and adapt to them in different ways; and not always in the best or fairest manner.
"Classical" humanitarian aid and its legacy in "modern" humanitarian aid
The model of humanitarian action that emerged after the Battle of Solferino in 1859 was based on the exceptional approach to the needs of people affected by emergencies under the umbrella of the basic humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. Under this way of understanding humanitarian action, amid a continuous normality there occurred a specific rupture caused by a particular emergency, to which it was necessary to mobilise and respond (Hilhorst, 2018).
From this initial approach, a great many characteristics have been inherited that today remain a cornerstone of humanitarian action of the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century (Plowright, 2024). These include the humanitarian principles, the power of the Global North and its organisations in the current humanitarian system (Aloudat & Khan, 2022), and even the cyclical model of funding by donors.
"Modern" humanitarian aid emerged as a response to new complex humanitarian crises
Over time, new characteristics have emerged that have further separated the classical and modern conceptions of humanitarian action. These include the professionalisation of humanitarian action (Hilhorst, 2018), its instrumentalisation by all kinds of actors (from governments to donors and armed groups), and the perpetuation of the most powerful humanitarian organisations. These organisations, aware that their interventions can alleviate suffering but cannot resolve humanitarian crises with complex political causes, seek to consolidate themselves, maintain their operations and grow in response capacity, at times even neutralising genuine attempts to reform and improve the system (Poole, 2025).
Throughout this evolution, many actors have also broadened their vision of what the goal of humanitarian action should be, thereby blurring the thin red line that originally established a clear dichotomy between rapid short-term immediate relief interventions in emergencies and long-term development cooperation (Slim, 2000). The medium term has conquered an enormous swathe of humanitarian action in protracted humanitarian crises, which can contribute to recovery once the acute phase of the emergency has passed, and to increasing the resilience of communities, societies and systems (Hilhorst, 2018). From this perspective, the humanitarian crisis is no longer understood as an exceptional situation, but as a new normality that may last for years, may never be fully reversed, and may even deteriorate again owing to new humanitarian emergencies.
What will humanitarian aid look like in the future?
Over the years, and in parallel to the learning, growth and improvements in humanitarian aid, the modern model of humanitarian action has also exposed its limitations and contradictions.
On the one hand, the gap separating local realities from the large international organisations that retain much of the control of the humanitarian system has widened (Hilhorst, 2018). There is more distance, more intermediaries, more bureaucracy and more inefficiency. On the other hand, and despite the many narratives in favour of empowering communities and local actors, high-income countries continue to dominate what humanitarian action does and how it does it (Aloudat & Khan, 2022). Many voices criticise that humanitarian action has not detached itself from the colonial legacy of these economic and political powers. They also assert that efforts to maintain an (apparently) apolitical humanitarian action have only enabled its total politicisation by the major powers (Weissman, 2003), resulting in complicity with an unjust world order that produces more complex humanitarian crises than ever.
Today, in the third decade of the twenty-first century, there is a global clamour for the power of humanitarian action to change hands and be decolonised (Magen-Fabregat et al., 2024). It is also hoped that this change will take place at the same time as the adoption of a feminist approach and one in favour of climate justice (Magen-Fabregat et al., 2024). At the same time, however, a critical decline is being experienced in the volume of humanitarian funding coming from the major donor agencies. In response to this, and still amid great uncertainty, many experts insist on the need not to propose yet another superficial reform, but to open a dialogue that allows us to rediscover what the new purpose and priorities of humanitarianism and humanitarian action should be and to redefine what the new role of its different actors should be (Poole, 2025).
References
- Aloudat, T., & Khan, T. (2022). Decolonising humanitarianism or humanitarian aid? PLOS Global Public Health, 2(4), e0000179. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000179
- Fassin, D. (2007). Humanitarianism as a politics of life. Public Culture, 19(3), 499–520. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-2007-007
- Fox, F. (2001). New humanitarianism: Does it provide a moral banner for the 21st century? Disasters, 25(4), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7717.00178
- Hilhorst, D. (2018). Classical humanitarianism and resilience humanitarianism: Making sense of two brands of humanitarian action. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 3, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-018-0043-6
- Magen-Fabregat, C., Aït-Aïssa, M., & Maiziere, P. A. (2024). The decolonisation of humanitarian aid and localisation: A critical synthesis. Humanitarian Aid on the Move, 26. Groupe URD. https://www.urd.org/en/review-hem/the-decolonisation-of-humanitarian-aid-and-localisation-a-critical-synthesis/
- Mosel, I., & Holloway, K. (2019). Dignity and humanitarian action in displacement (HPG Report). Overseas Development Institute. https://odi.org/en/publications/dignity-and-humanitarian-action-in-displacement/
- Plowright, W. (2024, March 20). The imperial past and decolonised future of humanitarian action. Alternatives Humanitaires/Humanitarian Alternatives, 25. https://www.alternatives-humanitaires.org/en/2024/03/20/the-imperial-past-and-decolonised-future-of-humanitarian-action/
- Poole, L. (2025, March 19). Reforming humanitarianism can’t be left to today’s decision-makers: How to avoid collapse? Look beyond the system’s centres of power. The New Humanitarian. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/opinion/2025/03/19/reforming-humanitarianism-cant-be-left-todays-decision-makers
- Slim, H. (2000). Dissolving the difference between humanitarianism and development: The mixing of a rights-based solution. Development in Practice, 10(3–4), 491–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520050116631
- Sphere Association. (2018). The humanitarian charter. In The Sphere handbook: Humanitarian charter and minimum standards in humanitarian response (4th ed.). https://www.spherestandards.org/handbook
- Weissman, F. (Dir.). (2003). À l’ombre des guerres justes: L’ordre international cannibale et l’action humanitaire. Flammarion. https://www.msf-crash.org/fr/publications/guerre-et-humanitaire/lombre-des-guerres-justes
NotebookLM
You can review my bibliographical references on humanitarianism and humanitarian action with this NotebookLM, an artificial intelligence-based research assistant. Want to know more?
How to cite this page
Abarca, B. (June 17, 2026). What is humanitarianism and humanitarian aid?. Salud Everywhere. https://saludeverywhere.com/en/humanitarian-aid-and-international-development/humanitarianism-and-humanitarian-aid/