The World Humanitarian Summit in 2016 deliberately avoided hard talk of systemic reform; instead, we got incrementalism, with innovation one of the drivers of change.
Amid some positive signs, serious shortcomings remain throughout the humanitarian system as it strives to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and delivery of aid.
At the heart of any effective humanitarian project is the ability to listen, learn, and act on the feedback from those affected by crisis.
The potentially positive effects of Cash-Transfer Programming have been demonstrated many times over. But how does the humanitarian ‘cash revolution’ present itself to those who are intended to benefit from it?
At the World Humanitarian Summit in May 2016, OECD donors and humanitarian actors made a series of commitments to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian aid – summarised in the Grand Bargain.
Humanitarians are increasingly turning to technologies that provide more affordable and effective ways to gather real-time feedback from people affected by humanitarian disasters.
At the World Humanitarian Summit last May, ‘A’ list Hollywood stars—Daniel Craig and Sean Penn—outnumbered ‘A’ list western politicians—Angela Merkel—by two to one.
Few people inspire such affection and respect in the humanitarian and development world as Hans Rosling. The sadness that met his death earlier this month is testament to the way he challenged and shaped the way we think about global public health and much else. With his bubble charts and narrative flourish
“What gets measured, gets managed”, as the saying goes. But what to measure? Most organisations tend to focus on measuring outputs: things like the numbers of aid workers deployed,
The lights are dimming across the humanitarian space as more and more governments choose to ignore or disavow the humanitarian rules promulgated in more enlightened times.