A week after the World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul, the dust is settling. Some did better out of the two-day meeting than others.
For most people caught up in today’s humanitarian maelstrom, life is nasty and brutish – and next week’s two-day World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul is probably too short for the far-reaching overhaul the system requires.
In my last post, I said that lack of competition is a flaw in the humanitarian system.
With two months to go until delegates assemble in Istanbul for the first ever UN summit devoted to humanitarian affairs,
In the mid 1980s, I worked on a huge relief operation in eastern Sudan for some 1.4 million people fleeing the conflict and famine in Ethiopia.
When we launched Ground Truth in 2012, we thought tracking the perceptions of the intended beneficiaries of aid – accurately and frequently – would prompt more responsive humanitarian programmes.
With the growing focus on effectiveness and accountability in humanitarian operations, expectations for feedback mechanisms are unrealistically high. Contemporary wisdom demands that they both provide insight on the perceptions of people affected by humanitarian disasters and create the impetus for follow-up action.
As Nepal pursues the long, slow recovery from the April earthquake, the latest survey of communities across the 14 worst hit districts indicates that people see progress on some of the key elements of the response.
This week’s global consultation on the World Humanitarian Summit looks like it will be long on calls for commitment to reform and short on agreement about how to make it happen.