Humanitarian Response

Rigorous evidence of the cost-effectiveness of investments in disaster preparedness is limited. However, overall the available data points to disaster preparedness leading to clear reductions in both humanitarian costs and losses due to crises (lost lives, assets, livelihoods). While there is general consensus on the importance of preparedness, significant challenges mean it still accounts for a very small proportion of humanitarian aid. There is a need for more research on the impact of disaster preparedness. This review details the evidence from a number of studies of disaster preparedness impact, focusing on cost (and time) effectiveness. The literature reviewed was a mixture of academic papers and development agency reports published in 2013-2018. Key findings include a study examining the economic case for investment in early response and resilience-building in disaster-prone regions of Kenya and Ethiopia concluded that early response was far more cost-effective than late humanitarian response (Fitzgibbon, 2013). Secondly, a cost-benefit analysis of emergency preparedness in relation to drought and flood hazards in Niger (Kellet & Peters, 2014) found that the benefits of investing in preparedness far outweighed the costs. Meanwhile, a 2015 study by the Boston Consulting Group found that all the emergency preparedness investments examined saved significant time and/or costs in the event of an emergency. A 2016 report (Venton, 2016) gives the findings of a Value for Money (VfM) assessment of DFID contingency funding that was provided early in the 2015/2016 Ethiopia drought crisis whereby timely procurement had helped DFID in saving 18%. A 2018 report (DEPP, 2018) gives the findings of a study of the return on investment (ROI) of DFID’s Disaster and Emergency Preparedness Programme (DEPP)’s capacity development investments in Ethiopia and the Philippines that yielded positive returns. Overall, this review found that there was evidence for cost-effectiveness of disaster preparedness, pre-financing and early action, but there remains considerable potential to increase savings. The literature points to the need for greater research into the impact of different disaster preparedness investments – as well as greater allocation of resources for preparedness.

This guidance framework is the output of discussions involving representatives from operational aid agencies and groups in South Sudan. The purpose of this guidance framework is:
1. To facilitate more nuanced understanding of organised violence in South Sudan and address potentially misleading use of catch-all terms (e.g. ‘inter-communal violence’ or ‘cattle raiding’)
2. To facilitate more constructive inter-agency dialogue and planning through a more consistent use of key terms used to describe organised violence in South Sudan
3. To summarise key considerations from a programming (rather than security/legal) perspective in relation to conflict sensitivity, livelihoods/services and protection.

This report investigates how COVID-19 and other shocks have impacted child well-being in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) during 2020 and the potential role of cash transfers and external resources to help children and economies. It reviews the latest social, economic and financial information from a range of global databases and modelling exercises, draws on emerging country-level reporting and carries out projections where recent data are unavailable. Although information remains incomplete and things are quickly evolving, the outlook is alarming.

Possible developments of movement and settlement patterns and humanitarian needs in the next six months after the re-designation of the Protection of Civilians sites.

The crisis in South Sudan calls for a critical reflection on past and forthcoming aidpractices in the country, and on the assumptions and ambitions that underpin them.

On the whole, donor engagement in South Sudan has been based on a flawedsituational framing, informing a dominant theory of change that disregarded key eliteinterests, misjudged the main conflict driver, promoted a culture of appeasement,and obscured symptoms of a deeply rooted crisis of governance. As this crisispushed itself to the fore in mid-December 2013, the old narrative of development andpartnership has become untenable. Donors should prepare and plan for working inan environment where armed conflict is cyclical and where periods of relative calmoffer limited options for longer-term development schemes or sustainable reform,narrowing the scope for constructive engagement and enhancing the risks involved.

Since the Second Sudanese Civil War in 1983, South Sudan has seen significant levels of displacement driven by conflict, resource stress, climate shocks, and disease. Movement, already an endemic feature of life in South Sudan, has enabled many South Sudanese households or household members to escape or mitigate years of shocks, but those deciding to move have often faced competing needs, physical risks, and constraints on movement. In order to better understand how both displacement routes and displacing households’ decision-making regarding movement has evolved over the past 35 years, REACH conducted research, consisting of secondary data review and quantitative and qualitative analysis, on long-term population movements trends in South Sudan between 1983-2019, to help humanitarians improve their ability to plan for early response in areas likely to receive displacement.

Since December 2013, South Sudan has once again been embroiled in wide-scale internal conflict, resulting in the internal displacement of 1.3 million people, with an additional 450,000 seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. The fighting and displacement has led to significantly increased requirements for humanitarian assistance, and a significantly scaled-up response, with some 3.8 million people in need, only 2.7 million of whom have been reached with some proportion of what they require (OCHA, 2014). Given the shortfalls in aid and the constraints – both physical and political – in accessing affected populations, there is widespread fear that the situation will deteriorate further before it improves. Humanitarian agencies have been trying to scale up operations over the past eight months, and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future.

In this report which also refers to South Sudan the authors present some of the findings of their four year, global research project into the state of humanitarian journalism around the world. They ask,

Which news organisations regularly report on humanitarian affairs? How are they funded, and what ethical problems or professional dilemmas does this create for journalists covering humanitarian affairs?
When natural disasters and violent conflicts are reported, what kinds of journalistic coverage do they receive? Do news outlets differ from one another, and if so, how?
How interested are news audiences in journalism about humanitarian affairs? How well does existing coverage serve their needs, and the needs of those involved in international aid? Which significant ‘gaps’ are there in news provision?
What effects does news coverage have on public attitudes towards international aid?

In protracted crises in which formal governance structures are weak to nonexistent, people depend
heavily on local systems—both social and economic—to get by, often more than they depend on external
aid. Communities themselves are often the first responders in a crisis, reacting long before the arrival of
humanitarian actors. Research on resilience across a range of contexts demonstrates the importance of social
connections, particularly in times of crisis, in enabling populations to manage shocks and stresses.
Social connectedness manifests in many forms: Communities may rely on their immediate neighbors,
extended family or clan chieftains for food, access to economic opportunities, and psychosocial support, or
to negotiate safe passage when fleeing from a conflict or when later returning to their communities of origin.
It is thus critical that aid actors understand how social connections and external assistance interact to better
help conflict-affected populations cope and recover.
However, social connectedness is not always a source of household resilience. Social connectedness is
inherently linked to social hierarchies and power dynamics. “Connectedness” for some households may imply
marginalization or exclusion for others. By considering social connectedness throughout program cycles,
including in design, implementation, and evaluation phases, aid actors can more holistically understand bases
of household vulnerability as well as sources of resilience during crises. These nuanced insights can be used
to ensure that formal assistance reaches households in most need, including ones that may be excluded from
local support systems, to better achieve recovery and resilience outcomes. Equally, by understanding social
connectedness, aid actors may be able to strengthen, or at the very least not undermine local support systems.
This report is the last in a series from the Currency of Connections research initiative between Mercy Corps
and the Feinstein International Center at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, at Tufts
University with support from the Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). The series is based on
mixed methods research conducted among resident, internally displaced, and refugee communities in South
Sudan and Uganda. This report employs a sequential exploratory mixed method design to:
1 Investigate the ways in which households rely on their social connections in the context of protracted
conflict and instability, highlighting the ways in which external interventions influence these local systems
of coping and support;
2 Explore the linkages between households’ social connectedness and resilience by constructing and testing
a contextualized quantitative measure of social connectedness.

This report explores the important role chiefs’ courts play in food security and in addressing hunger in South Sudan by reallocating food to vulnerable community members. Their role is particularly important in view of famine and recurrent extreme food insecurity affecting South Sudan. The authors suggest that chief courts potentially offer useful data for famine early warning and responses but also underline that humanitarian actors engaging with chiefs’ courts should do so with a contextually informed and locally nuanced approach.