Posted by Humanitarian Action or Alibi: Inequality Amidst Humanitarian Efforts
What Makes a Global Challenge a Priority?
As previously highlighted in the critical analysis of this blog, in which JustHumanitarian highlights its aims to raise awareness, provide thoughtful insights, and engage a broad audience in discussions on key global challenges—from disaster relief and refugee crises to human rights and sustainability. However, does the discussion of “key global challenges” unknowingly detract from the ideology presented at the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, where the UN Secretary-General called for humanitarian action to be ‘as local as possible, as international as necessary’?
This power balance is evident when reviewing the contributions of foreign aid in emergencies as part of an overall portfolio of international assistance (Dreher et al., 2013; Drury et al., 2005; Lumsdaine, 1993). Over the past 20 years, four donors have played a dominant role in humanitarian assistance—the United States, the European Commission, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Collectively, they accounted for 60 percent of humanitarian funding reported to the UN’s Financial Tracking Service (FTS) over the last decade (2012-21) (Roth, Purkayastha, & Denskus, 2024, p. 109).
Is it possible to prioritize humanitarian diplomacy in a way that maintains neutrality in aid distribution? With the global climate emergency, leaving a trail of destruction in its path, and economic dynamics overlapping with conflict, climate disasters, infectious disease outbreaks, and other crises, the need for humanitarian assistance has never been greater. However, is it being addressed effectively in its current form? As the number of global crises and donor demands for accountability grow (Lindenberg and Bryant, 2001), one review of coordination commissioned by OCHA sounded a rather dour note: “the repeated refrain of reviews and studies suggests that a pivotal problem confronting the system is its inability to change” (Reindorp and Wiles, 2001: 50) (Roth, Purkayastha, & Denskus, 2024, p. 119).
These complex questions, confronting the current system and process, prompt us to further examine the humanitarian sector, inspiring additional conversation.
8 Crises the World Must Not Look Away From in 2024
The EU and its member states have retained their position as one of the largest global humanitarian donors. According to the latest UN figures, nearly 300 million people in 72 countries will require humanitarian assistance and protection in 2024. In the face of this challenge, the European Union remains resolute in its commitment to providing aid to people in need wherever they are.
The Key Crises outlined by the European Union:
- Palestine: Forced displacement and famine risk
- Ukraine: Lives in danger and infrastructure destroyed
- Syria: Destruction and disease
- Haiti: Expanding gang violence in an increasingly fragile country
- Africa: Diseases, disasters, and displacement crises
- Myanmar: Escalating conflict increases humanitarian needs
- Extreme Weather Events: Wildfires and floods
- Earthquakes
By potentially concentrating humanitarian action based on their own nation-states’ interests, as previously discussed in the blog “Humanitarian Aid as a Political Tool,” this can further entrench the power of dominant states of the North, leaving some crises wholly ignored (Roth, Purkayastha, & Denskus, 2024, p. 102). With humanitarian principles appealing to a global and all-encompassing approach, ‘donors and humanitarian organizations make decisions with an awareness of their limited resources’ (Binder et al., 2013:8) (Roth, Purkayastha, & Denskus, 2024, p. 117). Analyzing the nexus between humanitarian policy and the EU’s political, military, and economic goals reveals that these strategic interests often compromise the very principles and building blocks for a human rights-infused humanitarian action (Roth, Purkayastha, & Denskus, 2024, p. 98). This approach creates a dependency between donor nations and recipient countries, further tightening subtle power dynamics and prolonging temporary humanitarian assistance into a state of dependence and reassertion of dominance, ultimately replicating global patterns of inequality.
A Way Forward
Is there a genuine opportunity for policymakers and politicians to localize aid. There remains a plethora of challenges. Five years after the announcement of the Grand Bargain, an average of only 2.9 percent of all aid from 2016-20 went directly to local actors, with most going to national governments. Could it be refocusing on the notion ‘as local as possible, as international as necessary’ as a significant driver of discontent is the lack of ownership. ‘Localization’ of aid—using more local actors and structures and allowing local voices to shape the aid process—can address this issue (Koch, 2024, p. 38).
Humanitarian aid requires a delicate balance between international support and local empowerment. By prioritizing localization, we can ensure that aid is more effective, equitable, and sustainable. This approach addresses the immediate needs of those affected by crises but also fosters long-term resilience and self-sufficiency. Policymakers and humanitarian organizations must commit to overcoming the challenges of localization, recognizing and mitigating biases, and ensuring that aid distribution remains neutral and focused on those most in need.
REFERENCES
European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations. (2024, November 26). 8 crises the world must not look away from in 2024. European Commission. https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/news-stories/stories/8-crises-world-must-not-look-away-2024_en
Inter-Agency Standing Committee. (n.d.). About the Grand Bargain. Retrieved November 22, 2024, from https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/about-the-grand-bargain
Koch, D.-J. (2024). Foreign Aid and Its Unintended Consequences. Routledge.
Roth, S., Purkayastha, B., & Denskus, T. (Eds.). (2024). Handbook on Humanitarianism and Inequality. Edward Elgar Publishing.
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. (2024). Global Humanitarian Overview 2024. United Nations. https://www.unocha.org/publications/report/world/global-humanitarian-overview-2024-enarfres