The World Humanitarian Summit is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and it has challenged the Start Network Member Agencies in fundamental ways. It has been difficult for operational organisations to find the time and space to think about the humanitarian response system, and to think about changes we can make today that will have a positive influence far into the future. It has also been difficult to think about what the Start Network says to the WHS so that it complements the Members’ own positions and ideas. That said, these challenges, however daunting, have enabled us to come to the conclusion that we must go beyond making the case for change, and instead realise change in all its dimensions. Having reflected on our experience of working together we call for four urgent changes, in a manner that would enable Start to be held to account in upholding its part in contributing to those changes:
- We call for a decentralised global humanitarian system. Humanity in a turbulent and uncertain world will be served most effectively by a decentralised humanitarian system, comprised of highly diverse organisations all operating according to the principle of subsidiarity, that is to say taking decisions and actions at appropriate levels, in these instances as close to the affected people as possible. Such subsidiarity requires several major changes in the ways the system operates, including: a rebalancing, so that considerably more capability and leadership resides at the local level; an increase in funding for local level organisations; and a real shift of power to crisis-affected populations. Local organisations, both from governments and civil society, must be further supported to strengthen their capacity and ability to respond. This will require donors to take on even more risk and enhance their institutional response mechanisms.
- We call for new collective financial mechanisms, like the Start Fund, to act as enablers of change in humanitarian action. All too often emerging crises are left to deteriorate because attention is elsewhere, political factors intrude or because adequate mechanisms to respond early do not exist. Whether it is conflict prevention, early action on emerging food crises, disease outbreaks, or capacity building for local actors, Start shows that a more proactive approach that uses local knowledge, objective scientific analysis and a fast, flexible and early response process can reduce suffering, save costs and empower communities to act in their own best interest. At least 10% of all humanitarian funding should be allocated in this way. That said, the ability to anticipate and respond early to emerging crises already exists, but the way humanitarian financing is administered undermines that ability. Changes are needed to existing funding mechanisms, donor risk and control systems, and the way funding is managed.
- We call for a repositioning of international institutions. Collaboration is difficult when humanitarian organisations compete for mandates and operational funding. This competition may mitigate an effective positioning of organisations so they are able to make the best possible contribution. The WHS may be the best opportunity in recent history to objectively evaluate the relative strengths and contributions of the various types of institutions that draw on humanitarian response financing. The UN, with its extensive programmes and agencies, should be used to anticipate and monitor crisis threats, while others may use their operational capacities to deal with crises, per se. We also need to think about collective stewardship by NGOs for the delivery of important services. Start Network experience suggests that collective stewardship and dispersed power enables faster, more effective, impartial, and more locally-led response.
- We call for stronger, more effective accountability across the entire humanitarian system. The humanitarian system can only be effective if its beneficiaries have influence over its behaviour. Moreover institutions and governments need help in upholding the commitments they make in the name of serving the world’s most vulnerable. A way must be found to ensure accountability at all levels and with all institutions in the humanitarian system. This way must be collectively shared, international and local, impartial, transparent and fair. It must transcend institutional mandates and parochial interests and take full account of the views, wishes and rights of beneficiaries and affected populations. It must be legitimate and able to wield influence. If this way were to be found, Start would uphold its guidance.
Comments