Search results

AbstractIn 2008, 260 humanitarian aid workers were killed or injured in violent attacks. Such attacks and other restrictions substantially limit the ability of humanitarian aid agencies to provide assistance to those in need, meaning that millions of people around the world are denied the basic food, water, shelter and sanitation necessary for survival. Using the humanitarian crises in Darfur and Somalia as examples, this paper considers the legal obligation of state and non-state actors to consent to and facilitate humanitarian assistance. It is shown that the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, as well as customary international law, require that states consent to and facilitate humanitarian assistance which is impartial in character and conducted without adverse distinction, where failure to do so may lead to starvation or otherwise threaten the survival of a civilian population. This paper considers whether this obligation has been further expanded by the development of customary international law in recent years, as well as by international human rights law, to the point that states now have an obligation to accept and to facilitate humanitarian assistance in both international and non-international armed conflicts, even where the denial of such assistance does not necessarily threaten the survival of a civilian population.

Throughout history man has been exposed to all kinds of disasters; but in modern times mankind has become aware of its responsibility towards those struck by disasters, and of its increased capability of coping with their consequences. Out of this growing awareness arose the concept of humanitarian assistance as a reflection of solidarity; this was followed by the formulation of legal rules governing such activity. Parallel to the need to provide humanitarian assistance is the corresponding right to such assistance.

AbstractRecent catastrophes, and predictions of an increasing potential for more, have stimulated thinking about the best policy responses to these threats. This article explores how security concepts influence catastrophe governance. The article considers how globalization affects thinking about catastrophes and describes ways in which catastrophes have been conceptualized as governance challenges, such as the human rights approach to the provision of health and humanitarian assistance. The article explains how health and humanitarian assistance experienced "securitization" in the post-cold war period, a development that challenges rights-based strategies and creates complex and controversial implications for the prevention, protection and response functions of catastrophe governance.

Presents the Mohonk Criteria for Humanitarian Assistance in
Complex Emergencies, produced by the Task Force on Ethical and Legal
Issues in Humanitarian Assistance, convened by the Program on
Humanitarian Assistance at the World Conference on Religion and Peace,
as guidelines for co‐operative relationships between political,
humanitarian and military actors in complex humanitarian emergencies
created by armed conflict.

It is increasingly widely recognised that humanitarian assistance is broadly understood in two distinct ways: one is to see it as a part of foreign policy, which is the customary position of donating states; the other is to see it as independent of governments and a matter of relieving suffering without distinction and is embodied in the Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross/ Red Crescent family. The present authors argue that any intervention is necessarily a political event and they support this contention with an examination of assistance in Sudan in general and Darfur in particular. In describing the way in which donating states concentrated on the settlement between Khartoum and south Sudan to the detriment of intervention in Darfur in time to forestall massive human slaughter, the authors are pointing to political failure. They also maintain that the consequence of not recognising and examining the political nature of humanitarian assistance is to reduce people affected by emergencies of all kinds to the status of victim, which deprives them of the ability to be the principal agents of their own recovery.

In the past decades, while global industrial progress has generally improved people's life, poverty, plague, and scarcity of resources are still major challenges for residents in many areas. Even in a modern society, catastrophe caused by a war or weather also often impacts its security and stability. In nations faced with such humanitarian challenges, many voluntary groups have been formed to assist hard-pressed governments in mitigating various crises. The purpose of this session is to discuss my current research project on workplace learning for those people who provide humanitarian assistance internationally.

Humanitarian workers are increasingly becoming the victims of political violence, in part because the nations in which they work may be so relatively powerless that their people feel threatened by the presence of foreign aid workers. Because of the threat to aid workers as well as the political complexities of foreign aid (of which attacks on foreign aid workers are one symptom) "the bar needs to be very, very high" before humanitarian aid can be justified in terms of the violence that may await aid workers. Justifications that meet this standard include severe human rights violations, extensive loss of life & human suffering, & genocide. D. Knaff

AbstractThe promise of innovation in humanitarian contexts has generated an expanding literature, from academics as well as practitioners. However, the field has become characterised by conceptual ambiguity and insular approaches, inhibiting the integration of findings and best practices. Therefore, this paper aims to identify the key concepts, definitions, and themes in humanitarian innovation (HI) research by applying a systematic literature review and content analysis. Based on data from 301 publications, we analyse scholarly and practitioner articles addressing the topic of humanitarian innovation. Our analysis suggests that efforts to reform the humanitarian system by leveraging innovation have been primarily ad hoc, fragmented, and serving miscellaneous separate objectives. This results in the implementation of incremental improvements, rather than transformative change throughout the sector. To bridge the gap between the various conceptualisations of HI, we propose a conceptual framework that provides a system perspective on HI, which includes the institutions, actors, contextual factors, and outputs of the system. The implications of our finding for further research and policy are discussed as well.Points for practitioners• Ensure active participation and inclusion of affected populations in innovation agendas and processes.• Strengthen collaborative efforts among actors (donors, practitioners, private sector, intermediaries, NGOs) in humanitarian sector to increase coordination, knowledge exchange, and bundling of resources for innovation.• Facilitate evidence-based approaches and data-driven decision-making, for the operationalisation of appropriate innovations.• Increase the quality and quantity of funding going to innovation actors, and steer funding towards innovations explicitly catering to the needs of affected populations.
Graphical Abstract