Key Issues and Controversies
It's an interesting time to be an aid worker – sometimes it feels like the dawn of a new, and not always pleasant, age. We're faced with spiraling insecurity and the militarization of foreign aid, while at the same time humanitarian reform efforts are also slowly changing how we work in the field. Add to this questions about how best to promote civilian protection, and the sometimes taboo topic of staff wellness and burn-out, and there are no shortage of issues and controversies.
1. Increasing Insecurity, Decreasing Humanitarian Space
From Afghanistan to Iraq, Darfur to Somalia, aid workers are increasingly a target. So far this year, 23 aid workers had been killed in Afghanistan (including four in mid-August 2008), twenty in Somalia, and ten in Darfur. Over the last few years, aid workers have also been killed in the Central African Republic, Iraq, Lebanon, South Sudan, and Sri Lanka.
Traditionally, humanitarian organizations based their security on gaining the acceptance and trust of local communities and, where necessary, belligerents. This “acceptance” model operated on the assumption that as long as they acted impartially and remained neutral and independent, no one would see them as a threat. In places like Afghanistan and Iraq, this assumption no longer seems to hold true.
In these and other insecure environments, aid agencies are re-evaluating how they operate and struggling to determine how best to guarantee the safety of their staff. Some organizations have opted to emphasize protection, remote programming, or – most controversially – deterrence measures such as accepting military escorts.
Attacks on humanitarian workers in turn affect millions of people who rely on humanitarian aid, since increasing insecurity translates into reduced humanitarian access. For instance, in Darfur, the UN estimates it can reach only 70% of the conflict-affected people, while in Afghanistan some estimate that NGO coverage today is only half of what it was four years ago.
Additional Information:
Providing Aid in Insecure Environments: Trends in Policy and Operations (HPG, 2006)
A Risky New World for Aid Workers (LA Times, 2008)
2. Increasing Politicization and Militarization of Foreign Aid
Donor nations have always given aid out of a mixture of realpolitik and humanitarian motives. Yet since September 11th, the United States in particular has made clear that its foreign assistance spending is meant to support the Global War on Terror. As then-USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios said in 2006: “Our strategic realignment to respond to the U.S. National Security Strategy positions USAID to implement the highest foreign policy objectives of President Bush, including the Global War on Terror and the Freedom Agenda.”
This, in turn, calls into question whether organizations that receive U.S. funding in places like Afghanistan or Iraq or even parts of Africa are, in fact, independent and neutral actors.
At the same time, the amount of U.S. foreign assistance channeled through the Department of Defense rose from 3.5% to 18% between 1998 and 2006. Through the use of CERP funding and the deployment of Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Afghanistan and Iraq, the military is also increasingly implementing relief projects directly as part of its counter-insurgency strategy. This issue is not limited to the US – other nations such as Germany, the Netherlands and the UK also run their own PRTs in Afghanistan.
Humanitarian agencies are concerned that this militarization of aid will only further blur the lines between humanitarian and military actors, thereby increasing the threats faced by aid workers in the field.
Additional Information:
USAID – Policy Framework for Bilateral Foreign Aid (2006)
Resetting the Rules of Engagement: Trends and Issues in Military-Humanitarian Relations (HPG, 2006)
3. Humanitarian Reform Efforts
Since the early 1990s, a series of reform efforts have tried to address the lack of “coverage, coordination and effectiveness” that often characterizes humanitarian operations, especially when hundreds of organizations (including UN agencies, the Red Cross / Red Crescent movements, and NGOs) suddenly converge on a crisis to offer assistance, each with its own mandate and agenda.
Recent reforms have focused on ensuring flexible and timely financing, strengthening the Humanitarian Coordinator system, and implementing the “Cluster Approach”, which seeks to improve coordination by designating a lead UN agency to lead on specific sectors.
To that end, Pooled / Common Humanitarian Funds, in which donors pool funds in order to ensure a more coherent funding approach, have already been established in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Sudan. A “Humanitarian Coordinator” – appointed by the UN and responsible for coordinating the humanitarian response in a given crisis – then takes the lead in allocating these funds, in line with commonly agreed needs and priorities.
This approach potentially represents an important step forward, and some progress has been made. That said, initial evaluations of the Pooled / Common Humanitarian Funds have been mixed. The development of the Cluster coordination system also raised a number of concerns (see also here).
Finally, it is still too early to determine what impact recent initiatives such the Humanitarian Coordination Strengthening Project – established in 2007 – have had on Humanitarian Coordinators in the field.
Additional Information:
Evaluation of Common / Pooled Funds in DRC and Sudan (OCHA, 2007)
4. Protection
Since the 1990s, humanitarian organizations have increasingly emphasized protection, in recognition of the fact that vulnerable populations often suffer as much if not more from insecurity as from a lack of basic necessities or services. To that end, one recent report defined protection as “means seeking to assure the safety of civilians from acute harm.”
Yet even as agencies start implementing explicitly protection-related activities, fundamental issues remain unresolved. A report by the Humanitarian Policy Group at the Overseas Development Institute identified two main questions. First, to what extent does a focus on protection undermine basic humanitarian principles such as neutrality and independence? Second, are protection activities actually effective at protecting vulnerable populations?
These questions are particularly relevant in the context of Darfur. The Sudanese Government has retaliated against agencies which have spoken out publicly on issues such as pervasive gender-based violence, which in turn has raised the question of whether such activities are worth the risk.
At the same time, it’s an open question whether protection activities in Darfur have made a difference. As one report noted: “The proliferation of new protection actors and the expansion of protection programming have not…led in the majority of cases to a significant improvement in the security of the civilian population of Darfur.”
Additional Information:
Protective Action: Incorporating Civilian Protection into Humanitarian Response (HPG, 2007)
The ‘Protection Crisis’: A Review of Field-Based Strategies for Protection in Darfur (HPG, 2006)
5. Staff Wellness and Turnover
Humanitarian organizations are struggling with how to support staff working in violent and dangerous situations. According to statistics gathered for an InterAction Forum on staff wellness in 2005, between 5-10% of aid workers in dangerous situations suffer diagnosable PTSD, while another 20% suffer partial PTSD.
In addition, 10-15% show symptoms of elevated levels of depression, 10-17% show symptoms of elevated anxiety, and 30-50% feel moderate to severe levels of emotional distress. In terms of substance abuse, 15% have more than three drinks a day. (All statistics available here.)
There is not only a personal toll, but also an organizational toll as well. According to the InterAction figures, 40% of staff in complex emergencies are at a high risk of burn-out. This, in turn, contributes to increasing staff turnover.
Additional Information:
Humanitarian Stress and Trauma Resources (InterAction)
Understanding and Addressing Staff Turnover in Humanitarian Agencies (HPN/HPG, 2006)
Helping Your Organization Address Staff Wellness (Presentation at InterAction Forum, 2005)
Image: AU Troops in Darfur - Flicker / Sokotocaliph
COMMENTS (0)