Humanitarian Response

This rapid review provides a synthesis of evaluations and learning reviews of cash-based programming in South Sudan. There is evidence that in South Sudan the cash-based programming help poor households address food needs and nutrition; and by injecting funds from vouchers, paid work, or grants into the local economy affect local markets. These cash based programmes are changing Sudanese society by affecting traditional kinship relationships and social safety networks; and affecting livelihood strategies as people are switching from subsistence to market-based activities. The review identifies and explains how injecting money into communities in growing volume influences the organisation of Sudanese society, including rebel groups and others who might profit. Additional material in this Helpdesk report is drawn from information published or presented by implementing agencies. This provides some evidence from South Sudan that cash based programmes bring numerous advantages. Both in terms of impact (improved nutrition, increased spending, assets replaced or added, children in school, women taking control over household spending). Also in terms of implementation (speed of delivery, efficiency and reduced transaction costs, the way in which cash transfers are delivered can help empower the target community – and the local community and market that surrounds them). The review prioritised information from 2014-2018 to provide more recent assessments of the impact from cash based programmes. There are few recent formal evaluations of cash transfer programmes although this strategy is mentioned within wider evaluations (WFP portfolio evaluation 2011-2016; Inter Agency Humanitarian Emergency evaluation 2015). However, gender considerations are often lacking from the evaluation literature. Where gender is considered the impact for women is largely assumed to be positive with women gaining purchasing power, making joint decisions about spending, and abandoning some high risk activity (collecting firewood from remote locations). Unfortunately, disaggregated data is not readily available. Although it is likely that activities targeted at the most vulnerable households would include a high proportion of households headed by women, or with vulnerable children under 5 years, or with a disabled family member this report is not able to verify if this was the case.

The report provides the latest food price developments at world, regional and national level. It focuses on countries where prices are abnormally high, based on GIEWS analysis and the Indicator of Food Price Anomalies (IFPA) for SDG target 2.c.

There is little evidence on the effects of Joint Needs Assessments (JNAs) and Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) on humanitarian organisations’ behaviour and humanitarian outcomes. JNAs are needs assessments undertaken jointly by humanitarian agencies and organisations to prevent duplication of effort, improve co-ordination and ensure a more independent report of needs. AAP designates a number of methods to either communicate to affected populations, gather feedback, use their feedback in programming or involve them in decision-making on programmes (or a combination of these). Reports have made a number of conclusions about the best ways of implementing feedback mechanisms in different contexts, including which technologies to use, how to ensure representative feedback, and how to include it in decision-making (Price, 2018). Case studies have pointed to ways in which individual feedback mechanisms have led to programme changes in the field, such as changing rations. They have also suggested ways in which AAP might be implemented in humanitarian organisations. The review has been unable to find evaluations of the effects of JNAs on humanitarian outcomes and organisational behaviour. Several case studies point to some barriers and enablers to JNA implementation. Synthesis reports suggest that implementation of JNAs has been limited by structural barriers in the humanitarian system (Derzsi-Horvath, Steets, & Ruppert, 2017).

February 2020 saw the formation of the executive of the Revitalised Transitional Government of National Unity (RTGoNU). Since then fighting between the signatories to the Revitalised Agreement on Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (RARCSS) has been significantly reduced, as parties broadly respect the ceasefire. However, although the agreement largely brought an end to violence between signatories, South Sudan continues to experience significant levels of organised violence. The scope and intensity of this violence at times match – or even surpass – that of the national civil war. To describe organised violence in South Sudan, terms like cattle raiding and revenge, ethnic or tribal violence, and inter-communal violence are widely employed.

This effort does not seek to eliminate the usage of terms such as cattle raid or inter-communal violence, as the occurrence of these events and the literal meaning of these terms remains. The purpose of this document, however, is to support a diversity of organizations and personnel engaging with issues of peace and conflict in South Sudan in pursuing greater and more accurate understanding of conflict dynamics. This document proposes revised terminology, including three categories of organised violence: national, sub-national, and localised violence. To place organised violence within the proposed categories, an analytical framework is provided, based on the key characteristics of violence: purpose, severity, and tools.

This report examines women’s leadership in locally led humanitarian action with case studies from Bangladesh and South Sudan. It seeks to understand whether and how local humanitarian leadership (LHL)—with its transfer of resources and power to local and national humanitarian actors (LNHAs)—can promote or constrain women’s leadership.

This report shares Oxfam’s experience with a water treatment plant community-led operator in Juba, South Sudan. It contributes to the debate on the role that communities can play in the process of managing water supply systems amid protracted crises. The report gives guidance on how to support professionalization of community services by providing business, governance and institutional support, and calls on donors and implementing agencies to develop WASH programmes which consider medium-term institutional support that ensures sustainability and pro-poor accessibility.

Given the dire humanitarian crisis in South Sudan, DFID commissioned research into patternsof displacement in order to guide policy and planning. The feildwork covered the areas mostaffected by the post-2013 conflict; Upper Nile, Jonglei and Unity. It did not cover the newareas of conflict (e.g. the Equatorias) which would merit further work. The researchers visitedProtection of Civilians (POC) sites, informal internally displaced person (IDP) settlementsreceiving international or government assistance, and dispersed places hosting displacedpeople which are either not receiving assistance or only assistance from a local community.

Sites were chosen to ensure a mix of factors, including displacement in zones of active orrecent conflict as well as relatively stable areas, and whether IDPs were living among peopleperceived as being on the same side in the conflict or not. In all cases, people were accessedthrough partnerships with organisations with strong links to communities. The findings weretested at a validation workshop held in Juba, and the report was externally reviewed.

This brief provides a context update about the current situation in Northern Bahr el Ghazal –a county in northern South Sudan.

The authors present safety and security challenges identified by communities, authorities and civil society such as food insecurity, gender-based violence, land and border disputes, weak justice systems and a lack of security services to turn to.

They also provide recommendations for how best to address these challenges for all levels of government and communities to consider.

Since December 2013 – only two and a half years after it became an independent country – South Sudan has been mired in a deep political, military, and humanitarian crisis. Heavy fighting erupted on 15 December between members of armed forces in Juba, the capital. Tensions and power struggles within the leadership ranks of the leading political party of South Sudan – the SPLM (Sudan People’s Liberation Movement) – had preceded the fighting. The armed violence quickly spread to other states in South Sudan and has brought human rights violations, death, and destruction to Juba and to Jonglei, Upper Nile, and Unity States.1 Within a few weeks, several thousand South Sudanese were killed. As of mid-June 2014, about 1.5 million South Sudanese are displaced either within South Sudan or as refugees in neighbouring countries; 94,000 South Sudanese are sheltering in ‘Protection of Civilian’ locations protected by the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS); and UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs projects that around 3.8 million South Sudanese need assistance in 2014 – only half of whom are being reached.2 A nationwide food security analysis led by the Government of the Republic of South Sudan (GRSS) in collaboration with development partners in June declared large parts of Unity, Jonglei, and Upper Nile States to be in a humanitarian emergency,3 and the President himself has raised the spectre of famine later in the year.4In response to the crisis, the Inter Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) began in early January to facilitate ceasefire talks between the main parties of conflict: the GRSS, led by the SPLM, and the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement/Army in Opposition (SPLM/A-IO). Since their onset, the Addis Ababa talks have been delayed several times. The GRSS and the SPLM/A-IO signed agreements on cessation of hostilities in January and again in May; but despite these agreements, the fighting continues and the new round of peace talks has been postponed.

This paper does not explore the background of the crisis. Many other reports have offered varying views of the events that led to the spreading violence in South Sudan. This paper is intended as a brief reflection on the current situation in South Sudan, based on meetings with GRSS, donors, humanitarian agencies, and members of South Sudanese civil society during a two-week mission by SLRC5 members in mid to late June. It outlines a few observations on the current situation; the breakdown of post- conflict mechanisms that were being put in place prior to the outbreak of the current violence in December; the peace process as it currently stands; and the humanitarian response. It concludes with some reflections on the need for better information and analysis, and outlines a short-term research agenda.

Diaspora humanitarianism grows out of transnational connections that link diaspora groups with their families and homelands. This relational and affective dimension enables rapid mobilisation and delivery to hard-to-reach areas.

Remittances to conflict-affected countries surpass official humanitarian aid six times, blurring boundaries between short-term emergency relief and long-term development.

Accountability practices tend to be informal and trust-based, structured around reputation. Overall coordination with formal political or humanitarian systems is usually absent.

This briefing is an output of the Diaspora Humanitarianism in Complex Crises (D-Hum) project, a partnership between the Danish Institute for International Studies, Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi, Rako Research and Communication Centre, and the Rift Valley Institute.

The briefing was written by Mohamed Aden Hassan, Sahra Ahmed Koshin, Peter Albrecht, Mark Bradbury (RVI), Fatima Dahir Mohamed, Abdirahman Edle Ali, Karuti Kanyinga, Nauja Kleist, George Michuki, Ahmed Musa, Jethro Norman and Obadia Okinda, and was originally published by D-Hum.