THEMATIC AREA
Dilemmas, challenges and commitments in humanitarian action
Humanitarian action faces tensions that have no perfect solution: humanitarian principles clash with one another, resources are never sufficient, humanitarian space is shrinking and staff security worsens year on year. At the same time, the humanitarian system has made commitments it has not yet fully kept: returning power to affected communities, funding and recognising local actors, and being genuinely accountable to those who receive assistance.
6
pages
What dilemmas and challenges does humanitarian action face?
Working in humanitarian action means making difficult decisions in difficult conditions. Although humanitarian principles provide a compass, they sometimes conflict with one another. Added to this, the instrumentalisation of aid increasingly restricts humanitarian space, and insecurity for humanitarian actors and their staff worsens year on year.
- The humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence can conflict with one another. When this happens, nothing guarantees a perfect solution.
- The most common dilemma in humanitarian action is the scarcity of resources: there is never enough to meet all needs. This requires prioritising between coverage and quality, between more or less vulnerable populations, and between more or less costly activities.
- Humanitarian organisations sometimes remain silent in the face of abuses and injustices to avoid losing access to populations in need of assistance. Although that silence is not necessarily complicity, it is highly controversial and widely debated.
7-minute read + 1 AI-assisted reflection question
→ Read more.
- Humanitarian space is the physical and symbolic environment in which humanitarian actors can operate safely and without impediment in order to uphold humanitarian principles.
- Humanitarian space is continuously threatened by attacks on humanitarian staff, the politicisation and instrumentalisation of aid, international sanctions and counter-terrorism measures, and legal and bureaucratic restrictions that limit access to affected populations.
- Protecting humanitarian space requires upholding the principles of neutrality and independence, engaging in humanitarian diplomacy and advocacy, coordinating among actors, and increasingly, supporting the leadership of local actors in access negotiation.
11-minute read + 1 AI-assisted reflection question
→ Read more.
- More than 150 humanitarian workers are killed every year as a result of violent attacks, and a further 130 are kidnapped. The problem worsens year on year, shrinking the available humanitarian space.
- The acceptance strategy is based on proactively building the trust and support of local communities and their authorities. It is the essential approach, but it is not always sufficient on its own.
- The protection strategy seeks to reduce vulnerability through equipment measures, internal procedures and coordination with other actors.
- The deterrence strategy, which includes armed escorts or diplomatic pressure, is reserved as a last resort. It adds risks of its own and can seriously undermine community acceptance.
5-minute read + 1 AI-assisted reflection question
→ Read more.
How does the humanitarian system intend to return power to communities and local actors?
The humanitarian system has spent decades acknowledging that affected communities and local actors should have more power, more voice and more resources. Reform after reform has produced normative frameworks, commitments and tools to make this possible. However, the real power dynamics have barely changed when it comes to community participation, accountability and the empowerment of local actors.
- The Core Humanitarian Standard sets out nine commitments that any humanitarian organisation must adopt in its relationship with communities.
- These commitments range from ensuring equitable access to assistance and the participation of people in decisions that affect them, to the establishment of safe mechanisms for expressing complaints and the ethical management of resources.
- Despite progress, the power imbalance between humanitarian organisations and assisted populations persists. There is more emphasis on documenting participatory processes than on achieving genuine empowerment.
7-minute read
→ Read more.
- Local actors can respond quickly, cost-effectively and with community legitimacy, but receive less than 3% of direct humanitarian funding and occupy few leadership and decision-making positions.
- In 2016, the humanitarian system committed to channelling 25% of funding to local actors as directly as possible, a target that has not been met and has since been progressively watered down.
- Without overhead funding, local and national humanitarian organisations cannot develop management structures, retain experienced staff or compete on equal terms.
6-minute read + 1 AI-assisted reflection question
→ Read more.
- Successive humanitarian reforms have promised a "participation revolution" that has never materialised.
- Humanitarian organisations continue to control what information is collected, how it is analysed and what decisions are made with it, with little change in the power dynamics between them and the communities they serve.
- Genuine community participation requires more time and flexible funding than current project cycles allow. As a result, a growing number of voices are calling for longer cycles and increased multi-year funding as a prerequisite.
5-minute read
→ Read more.