HUMANITARIAN REFORM: STRENTHENING HUMANITARIAN REPONSE

BUILDING A STRONGER, MORE PREDICTABLE HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE

SYSTEM

WHY WAS A HUMANITARIAN REFORM NEEDED?

Findings from the 2005 Humanitarian Response Review

• Unpredictable capacity and insufficient accountability by humanitarian actors

• Erratic coordination, weak partnerships

• Long-standing gaps in the humanitarian response, including lack of commitment to recovery interventions at early stage

• Donor policies inconsistent

A CHANGING HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT

• Diverse group of actors

• Increasing number of humanitarian crises

• Competitive funding environment

• Challenges in maintaining necessary humanitarian space and independence

• Increased public scrutiny of humanitarian action

Whose reform?

Composed of NGO consortia, Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, IOM, World bank and UN agencies

Inter-Agency Standing Committee Full Members and Standing Invitees

Full Members

Food and Agricultural

Organisation (FAO)

Office for the Coordination of

Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)

United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP)

United Nations Population Fund

(UNFPA)

United Nations High Comissioner

for Refugees (UNHCR)

United Nations Children’s Fund

(UNICEF)

World Food Programme (WFP)

World Health Organisation

(WHO)

Standing Invitees

International Committee of the

Red Cross (ICRC)

International Council of Voluntary

Agencies (ICVA)

International Federation of Red

Cross and Red Crescent

Societies (IFRC)

American Council for Voluntary

International Action (InterAction)

International Organisation for

Migration (IOM)

Office of the High Commissioner

for Human Rights (OHCHR)

Office of the Special

Representative of the Secretary

General on the Human Rights of

Internally Displaced Persons

(RSG on HR of IDPs)

Steering Committee for

Humanitarian Response (SCHR)

World Bank (World Bank)

PARTNERSHIPS

CA

PA

CIT

Y

&

PR

ED

ICTA

BA

ILIT

Y

FIN

AN

CIN

G

LE

AD

ER

SH

IP

STRENGTHENING HUMANITARIAN

RESPONSE

Enhance humanitarian response capacity Predictability, Accountability and Partnership

WHY PARTNERSHIP?

Humanitarian agencies acknowledge that no single agency can cover all humanitarian needs

Principles of Partnership:• Equality

• Transparency

• Results Oriented Approach

• Responsibility

• Complementarity

OVERALL HUMANITARIAN LEADERSHIP

• Humanitarian Coordinators• Selection • Skills

• Humanitarian Country Teams• Inclusive• Strategic

• Accountability

ROLE OF THE HC

• Establish and lead Humanitarian Country Team • Facilitate agreement among humanitarian actors on establishment

of sectors/clusters and designation of sector/cluster leads • Establish appropriate mechanisms for inter-sectoral coordination• Coordinate needs assessment, strategic planning, response

planning, monitoring & evaluation, integration of cross-cutting issues • Advocate for respect for human rights, humanitarian law,

humanitarian principles, and access • Coordinate inter-agency resource mobilization efforts, including

appeals and requests for CERF funding• Accountable to the Emergency Relief Coordinator

WHAT IS GOOD HUMANITARIAN FINANCING?

• Plurality, diversity and complementarity of funding mechanisms (majority of funds are bilateral grants)

• Predictable, impartial, equitable, timely

• Ensure UN and non- UN have equitable and transparent modalities to obtain funding

• Strategies and channels should not inhibit or be to the detriment of partnerships.

THE CLUSTER APPROACH

11 Clusters established and endorsed by IASC

At global level:

• Clear accountable lead agencies

• Stockpiles, surge capacity, and resources

• Operational guidance, toolkits and handbooks

At country and field level:

• Coherent coordination systems

• Less gaps/duplication

• Strengthened partnerships and links to government

THE 11 GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN CLUSTERS

RESPONSIBILITIES OF GLOBAL CLUSTER LEADS Normative - Standard setting and consolidation of ‘best practice’

Build response capacity- Training and system development at local, regional and international

levels- Surge capacity and standby rosters- Material stockpiles

Operational Support Emergency preparedness Advocacy, coordination and resource mobilization

COUNTRY LEVELCluster Lead Agencies responsible for ensuring:

• Inclusion of key humanitarian partners• Establishment of appropriate coordination mechanisms• Coordination with national/local authorities, local civil society etc.• Participatory and community-based approaches• Attention to priority cross-cutting issues (age, environment, gender, HIV/AIDS etc)• Needs assessment and analysis• Emergency preparedness• Planning and strategy development• Application of standards• Monitoring and reporting• Advocacy and resource mobilization• Training and capacity building• Provision of assistance and services as ‘provider of last resort’

RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT MOVEMENT

ICRC

• “ICRC is not taking part in the cluster approach”

• Coordination between ICRC and the UN continues to the extent necessary to achieve efficient operational complementarity

IFRC

• “convener” rather than “cluster lead” for emergency shelter in disasters

• “not committed to being provider of last resort, nor is it accountable to any part of the UN system”

INCLUSION OF EARLY RECOVERY

• Early Recovery is a necessary framework to transition out of humanitarian assistance

• Lack of commitment to Early Recovery by development agencies, government and donors

• Responding to critical gaps in response addressed by no one else.

PROGRESS TO DATE…• Roles and responsibilities clearer• Partnerships and coherence improved• Fewer response gaps• Engagement with national authorities – or tracking of ...• Convergence on definitions, guidelines, and assessment methodologies • Shift towards a more programmatic, rather than project-based,

approach • ‘Significant potential to enhance overall effectiveness of humanitarian

response’

CHALLENGES REMAIN…• Stronger in-country leadership • Inclusive humanitarian country teams• Preparedness and contingency planning• In-country and regional capacity development• Clearer accountability mechanisms• Sustained political commitment • Government ownership• Demonstrated impact on affected population?

TRANSFORMATIVE AGENDA

Main elements constituting the Transformative Agenda:• Etabslishing a mechanism to deploy strong, experienced senior humanitarian

leadership at highest levels.

• Stengthening of leadership capacities and rapid reployment of humanitarian leaders within the cluster mechanism

• Improvement of strategic planning at country level that clarifies the collective results – across and within clusters

• Enhancing accountability of the Humanitarian Coordinator and HCT – ensuring achievement of collective results

• Streamlining coordination mechanisms – adapting to operational requirements – to better facilitate delivery of results

INTER-CLUSTER COORDINATION OF EARLY RECOVERY

Example: Zimbabwe – Context and key challenges

• The complex state of transition in Zimbabwe challenges coordination among clusters. Not least due to the considerable differences in sector-specific needs.

• The recent political developments have allowed for enhanced humanitarian access to vulnerable populations and greater engagement by GoZ with the international community. But expectations by donors remain low.

• Conflicting perceptions among the humanitarian clusters regarding the definition and relevans of ’Early Recovery’ further challenged the establishment of common ground – resulting in a change in name.