CAN VOLUNTEERING BE A SIGN OF HUMANITARIAN QUALITY?

Statement by Mr Encho GOSPODINOV, Special Adviser to the EC Commissioner for International

Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis response

Dear Colleagues,

Working with volunteers for over 20 years in war-and-disaster-torn countries has always led to a

question: can volunteering be a sign of high professional standards in humanitarian aid, in addition

to being a mere form of compassion and willingness to help?

Is the perception of thousands of young men and women delivering food and clothes for free a

symbol of enthusiasm and strong civil society, or is it a rather chaotic, disorganised wave of human

solidarity in tragic moments of floods and earthquakes?

These are very important questions today, when volunteerism is on the rise and almost 100 million

adults are volunteering in the EU countries alone. Recent statistics show that the number of

organisations using volunteers is increasing, as is the number of skilled professionals or less

experienced young people ready to be deployed in the field abroad or act in their own communities.

This growth of solidarity, however, is not an easy business. Neither it is a cheap one. But one of the

most important issues here is the quality of the work done by volunteers. And it is linked to the

additional issue of who ensures this quality? Who certifies, or gives some level of guarantees that

volunteers are dispatched to work only after they have been well prepared, and could offer

assistance which is really needed?

In the cold winter exactly 22 years ago as a Red Cross field manager I witnessed how enthusiasm was

wrongly mixed with amateurish efforts to deliver food and shelter to the people of Armenia,

struggling to survive after a horrific earthquake. I saw well intended, but very chaotic, and at times

damaging efforts to do good by not knowing how. Certainly, many of you here have your own

experience in this context.

Despite the big progress made in working with volunteers during the last 20 years, there are still

gaps to be addressed:

• How do we identify and select those volunteers who will add value to the humanitarian

work, while gaining field experience for themselves?

• Who is in charge of training those volunteers; who sets standards for training and certifies

that young, or less young volunteers, go to the field well prepared, with not only big hearts,

but with skills which will guarantee saving those in need and doing no harm to the

community, where other may already do a good humanitarian work?

• Who deploys these volunteers and takes responsibility for what they do?

These are just a few of many questions to which the experts in the European Commission are trying

to find the answers for. While the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (EVHAK) is under

debate and “construction”, we want to be sure that by answering urgent needs, we – at the same

time - keep an eye on equally important challenges:

* Demand-driven services of volunteers;

* Security issues which often arise in the field where the volunteers act;

* Ensuring that by bringing skilled people from abroad to help, we do not divert funds directed to

victims, and

* Do not compete with, but rather assist, train, and work in harmony with the local humanitarian

actors and especially with their volunteers.

These are important elements of the EC thinking of how to create a proper, effective, efficient, and

yet partners-oriented volunteer corps which will work with others, listen to others, and learn from

others. More over, to go beyond humanitarian aid, and act as an European family, extending to

those in need our values, solidarity and cooperation.

Tapping on both enthusiasm and skills, it may be a valuable idea to target various groups of

volunteers, depending on the context they may be used. Young and inexperienced volunteers could

help In some cases with less sophisticated administrative work, while for them it could, and should

be part of their learning and training.

Young professionals could be a strong humanitarian arm in times of crises, provided they are

properly selected and sent to the right place at the right time.

And finally, skilled experts may not be so young anymore, but they could fill the gap where others

cannot address specific humanitarian needs. In this context we can always remember that beauty is

in diversity, but the power is in unity.

In doing all this, we believe that cooperative approaches are needed, and certain level of

cooperation and coordination ensured, so the efforts by both professionals and volunteers alike will

lead to the most desirable effect: saving lives, helping the communities to help themselves, and thus

building a strong civil society.

Now let me mention another important issue the European Union, and the Commission , may want

to pay attention to: certification of volunteers’ skills.

In the private sector quality control is ensured and certified by special mechanisms and practices.

While adopting quality standards for making cars or TV sets and issuing certificates may be a bit

easier task, how do we certify that volunteers are well selected, trained and ready to deliver high

quality humanitarian assistance? Many agencies already have their systems of certification. But

maybe the time has come to “pack” those standards in a comprehensive and practical way. Surely

the EC/EVHAC may play a role here. As with the SPHERE project and the Red Cross/Red Crescent

driven IDRL process, the combined efforts by many humanitarian actors, supported by the EC, can

add value to the idea of common certification standard which guarantees high level of quality work

provided by volunteers.

It will not be a quick work done by a few experts. Rather, it may trigger a process, in which the best

practices, rules and regulations could be identified, put together and if required, adapted for today’s

needs and demands for efficiency, transparency, accountability and reflecting the principles of

humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence. If this has been done through SPHERE project

for setting standards in providing various types of relief; if IDRL is tapping on the best legal practices

and instruments for facilitating assistance, something similar, with more universal standards could

be done in the field of volunteerism. The creation of EVHAC may help materialize this approach and

bring practical results.

EVHAC may also contribute to volunteer-related knowledge-sharing among all major humanitarian

actors who recruit, train and deploy volunteers. Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement, UNV and others

have rich experience in working with volunteers, but the best practices may not be known or shared

by all; significant efforts, instruments and resources for improvement of volunteers’ work are being

used without enough information sharing and many organisations are working “in silos”. This often

leads to duplication of efforts, waste of time and knowledge and unnecessary competition. But most

important, it does not help us improve the quality of volunteers’ work and deliver better services to

the needy.

There are many other important details linked to those two issues – certification and quality of

volunteers work – but time does not permit me to go further. Let me assure you that all EC

colleagues working on the EVHAC creation will listen carefully to what you say. And going back to

my field practice, I remember how the Iranian Red Crescent volunteers and professionals together,

well trained, timely deployed and efficient, saved 90% of the people still alive under the collapsed

buildings in 2003 Bam quake, before the foreign experts arrived on the scene. The lesson was that

years of investment in well trained volunteers, support from the local Government and from peer

organizations abroad led to miracles out of the ruins.

Thank you for your attention.