Global Humanitarian Assistance 2007/2008

Published in March 2008, Global Humanitarian Assistance 2007/2008 is the fifth in a series of reports produced by Development Initiatives as part of the wider Global Humanitarian Assistance (GHA) programme.

Chapter 1 attempts to quantify and analyse long-term trends in humanitarian assistance. How much official humanitarian assistance is there? How does it compare with aid expenditure as a whole? How generous are donors in terms of expenditure per citizen or as a share of gross national income (GNI)? What about other sources of humanitarian assistance? How does the bilateral allocation of humanitarian assistance reflect the humanitarian priorities defined in the UN consolidated appeal process (CAP)? Is it reaching everyone in need?

Chapter 2 looks at the latest developments in humanitarian assistance financing and policy. What are the implications of the 2007 introduction of new rules for reporting and analysing official humanitarian assistance and aid? Are the funding mechanisms such as common (pooled) humanitarian funds (CHF) and Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) achieving their objectives to strengthen humanitarian response? What steps are being taken to improve predictability, response capacity and coordination?

Further details and supporting data are available online at:

www.globalhumanitariandonorship.org

UNHCR: The Impact of Environmental Degradation on Refugee-Host Relations: a Case Study from Tanzania

While the majority of literature in the field of refugee studies centres on refugees specifically, recent years have seen an increasing amount of research that looks beyond the refugee communities to the other groups and individuals also affected by refugee emergencies. In particular, these studies look at how the host communities – the communities living in the areas where refugees eventually settle, either formally or informally – are impacted by a rapid and often unexpected influx of refugees.

The document is available for download from Reliefweb.

Sometimes refugees bring positive changes to host communities, such as economic growth or the funding of various development projects by international aid organizations that have come to the area in response to the refugee emergency. However, the influx and presence of refugees has also been shown at times to have negative impacts on individuals within a hosting community, or even on the community as a whole. In light of this, it is important to not only investigate the impact of the presence of refugees on the hosting communities, but also to consider how these impacts have then influenced the overall relationship between the two groups. In particular, it is important to determine what might contribute to a contentious or even conflictual relationship. A better understanding of this can ultimately assist those working with refugees in other situations, to plan and implement projects that may lessen the likelihood of such conflict.

One of the most frequently cited negative impacts in recent years, emphasized in particular by the host country governments, is environmental degradation and natural resource depletion. However, it is not only the host governments that claim that refugee camps cause environmental degradation: over the past several decades, there has also been a growing acceptance by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other organizations working with refugees, as well as by independent researchers, that the presence of refugees often leads to environmental degradation and natural resource depletion both within and around the refugee settlements. As written in the UNHCR manual entitled Key Principles for Decision Making: “Evidence shows that large-scale dislocation of people, characteristic of many recent refugee crises, can create adverse environmental impacts. The scale and suddenness of refugee flows can rapidly change a situation of relative abundance of local resources to one of acute scarcity” (Engineering, 2005: 3).

UNHCR and IOM on Climate Change and Migration

Two new reports out recently deal with the migration and climate change nexus - first, this from the UNHCR:

The term "environmental refugees" was first coined in 1985 as a report title for the United Nations Environment Programme (El-Hinnawi 1985). It has since been widely diffused in both political and academic circles (Castles 2002). This growing concern of the international community about the consequences of migration resulting from environmental deterioration was reinforced in 1990 by the publication of the first UN intergovernmental report on climate change which stated that "The gravest effects of climate change may be those on human migration as millions will be displaced" (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 1990, 20).

The links between climate and human migration are not new (Beniston 2004). Thus, the droughts of the 1930s in the plains of the American Dust Bowl forced hundreds of thousands of migrants towards California, and those that struck the Sahel between 1969 and 1974 displaced millions of farmers and nomads towards the cities. Notwithstanding the present media focus, the amount of systematic research on environment and migration remains quite limited.

In this article we will first try to understand why the environmental aspect of the study of migration and refugees has, up until now, been neglected. We will then propose a definition of population movements induced by environmental factors, before concentrating on climate aspects by providing a synthesis of results put forward by researchers. Finally, we will examine forecasts for future developments.

The article can be downloaded from Reliefweb. The International Organisation for Migration has just released 'Migration Research Series No. 31 on Migration and Climate Change':

This report focuses on the possible future scenarios for climate change, natural disasters and migration and development, looking to increase awareness and find answers to the challenges that lie ahead.

The report states that even though it is defined as a growing crisis, the consequences of climate change for human population are unclear and unpredictable. In 1990, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) noted that the greatest single impact of climate change could be on human migration -with millions of persons displaced by shoreline erosion, coastal flooding and agricultural disruption. Since then various analysts have tried to put numbers on these flows of climate migrants, the most widely repeated prediction being 200 million by 2050.

The study points out that the scientific basis for climate change is increasingly well established, and confirms that current predictions as to the “carrying capacity” in large parts of the world will be compromised by climate change.

The document is available for download from Reliefweb.

HPG Policy Brief 30: Humanitarian Action in Iraq: Putting the pieces together

Five years on from the invasion of Iraq by Coalition forces and the situation for civilians in the country is dire. Humanitarian personnel attempting to provide relief and protection have faced huge challenges and risks due to insecurity, restricted access and logistical difficulties. This has led to a fragmented response.

This latest Policy Brief explores the key constraints to principled humanitarian action in Iraq, and questions whether the international community is ready to address these issues as it prepares to scale up humanitarian action in 2008.

The Policy Brief is available to download from the HPG website.

Drawing on interviews with a range of individuals and organisations currently working in Iraq, its key messages are as follows:

• International humanitarian action in Iraq since 2003 has been inadequate to the nature and scale of the task. It has been piecemeal and largely conducted undercover, hindered by insecurity, a lack of coordinated funding, limited operational capacity and patchy information.

• As humanitarian agencies look to scale up interventions in 2008, most of the earlier challenges to providing assistance in Iraq - political, institutional and operational - continue to exist.

• More concerted action is possible in Iraq, but there is a problematic lack of consensus on needs and on the scope for safe access. Needs in Iraq vary widely between different area and the absence of information systems that are up-to-date and accurate has hampered humanitarian action.

• Humanitarian action is neither a tool of nor a substitute for political action so the humanitarian community needs to draw clearer lines between its role and that of political and military actors. Blurring these distinctions compromises access to relief and the safety of local and international aid workers.

• There is an urgent need to establish a common humanitarian agenda in Iraq and to re-assert a clear humanitarian identity. This demands that agencies establish the means to agree a shared assessment of needs and analysis. It also requires a re-affirmation of humanitarian principles as a basis of a new compact with civil society and Iraqi communities.

MSF: Blog Invitation - Saving Lives or Saving the Environment?

Following the motion passed by the MSF-UK General Assembly in 2007, MSF organised a Discussion Evening last December on the issue of climate change and humanitarian action. Can we continue with humanitarian and development work without adding to environmental damage? What impact will environmental factors have on our work? Can we save both lives and the environment?

We have now launched a blog in order to continue the exchange of ideas and opinions on climate change and humanitarian action and the possible implications for MSF. The blog features two short articles: one by Andrew Pendleton, Senior Climate Analyst with Christian Aid and one of the speakers at the discussion evening, challenging MSF to act on climate change; and a reply by David Weatherill, Water, Hygiene and Sanitation Advisor with MSF Spain.

We encourage you to add your views on our website.

The Discussion evening mentioned above was attended by Clare Sayce and Laura Hudson, and a transcript is available from the MSF website. Some of the speakers were interesting, and the tapas as good as ever, but the debate perhaps still focussed at the level of a global debate on the causes and possible mitigations of climate change, rather than specific ramifications and actions for the humanitarian community and the people we seek to help. Perhaps this stems from the view held by agencies such as Christian Aid (who see climate change as an issue of global social justice) that neutral organisations such as MSF and the Red Cross Movement have yet to publicly take climate change seriously. Much of the debating time was devoted to whether or not MSF should engage in the politics of climate change. It will be interesting to see, in the coming months, how this discussion develops on the MSF blog.

TUFTS: Peter Walker gives us the good news

All too often those in the humanitarian world sees the cup half empty. Maybe it is as a result of working in a business that is about constant problem-solving, crises and distress. So last week, at the prompting of some of our students, I asked eight experienced long-time humanitarian workers what they saw as the successes of the past generation. Their answers ... make hopeful reading.

The legal framework of humanitarian work has improved, the assertion and recognition of people’s rights have improved. Humanitarian space is being negotiated more robustly and there is a greater understanding of the global and local context of emergency operations. The norms of the endeavor, standards, codes etc have become more effective. And finally there are many individual relief operations over the past generation which have made a significant difference to people’s lives.

Read the full list on the Tufts blog.