humanitarian principles, volunteerism & coordination ... · demac humanitarian workshop series...

Funded by ECHO, the DEMAC project is implemented by Danish Refugee Council, AFFORD-UK, & the Berghof Foundation to improve

diaspora emergency response capacity and coordination with the conventional humanitarian system

1

NEW WAYS OF WORKING DEMAC Humanitarian Workshop Series – Copenhagen 2016

HUMANITARIAN PRINCIPLES, VOLUNTEERISM & COORDINATION

Workshop Report

ABSTRACT

Against the background of numerous protracted humanitarian crises, there is a growing

interest by key stakeholders of the international humanitarian system in relief efforts of

diaspora communities in the northern hemisphere. The debate has evolved beyond

partnership necessities between ’conventional’ humanitarian actors, among them donor

states, UN agencies and international humanitarian organisations and Diaspora

communities, focusing now on operational mechanisms for more successful complimentary

partnerships.

2

CONTENTS

Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

1. Workshop Summary .......................................................................................................................... 3

2. Overview of the workshop .................................................................................................................. 4

3. Main Points of discussions .................................................................................................................. 4

Ethics, Humanity and Humanitarian Principles in Practice ................................................................................ 4

Highlights from the group discussions ........................................................................................................................ 5

Diaspora humanitarianism ............................................................................................................................................... 5


Good Practices of Cooperation and Partnership ...................................................................................................... 7


Information sharing and information management in the humanitarian system ..................................... 8


Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

List of Participants ............................................................................................................................................................. 11

3

1. WORKSHOP SUMMARY

This report summarises the discussions and recommendations from the workshop hosted by the Danish

Refugee Council (DRC) on 25 - 27 February 2016 in Copenhagen as part of the DEMAC Humanitarian

Workshop Series. The purpose of the workshop was to provide an interactive space for participants

from ‘conventional’ humanitarian actors, including UN agencies and international NGOs, and Diaspora

humanitarian organisations to jointly identify innovative ways and methods of cooperation for a more

effective response in an enhanced humanitarian system. The main recommendations to consider were:

Identifying the different ways of working by the participants with a focus on comparative

advantages of partnership working : examples from Sierra Leone and Syria demonstrated how

diaspora organisations and conventional actors had worked effectively together

Formation of partnerships enabling shared expertise, better access of Diaspora humanitarians to funding resources, risk assessment and information management tools of ‘conventional’

humanitarian actors.

Diasporas’ role as primary ‘responders’ and their engagement with local affected

communities is rarely systematically considered or fully documented by Diaspora humanitarians

themselves. Hence, the need for clearer methodological assessment and documentation of

diaspora efforts and their impacts.

Establishment of inter-Diaspora dialogue forums and support for information flow between

Diaspora and conventional actors.

Training and capacity building of Diaspora organisations and subsequently local NGOs and

community-based initiatives.

Improved information sharing and relationship building of donors and conventional

humanitarian actors with Diaspora and beneficiaries could increase trust, transparency and

accountability between sectors.

The major discussions that informed these recommendations centred on:

Understanding different roles, methods and modalities of humanitarian engagement and

emergency response by diaspora networks and the ‘conventional’ international

humanitarian system.

Identifying feasible operative steps enabling an increased engagement between diaspora

organisations and the ‘conventional’ humanitarian system.

Reviewing challenges of principled humanitarian action and partnerships for

coordination efforts.

Examining solution-oriented coordination approaches in an enhanced humanitarian

system.

4

2. OVERVIEW OF THE WORKSHOP

The workshop extended over 3 days. The first day was dedicated to exchanges on humanitarian

principles, ethics and volunteerism. Two presentations on humanitarian principles and principled

humanitarian action in practice were provided by Kathrine Starup (DRC), followed by a presentation of

the key findings of the DEMAC diaspora study by Erik Mohns (Berghof Foundation).

The second day, dedicated to coordination mechanisms and information management in the

international humanitarian system, consisted of sessions on the ‘conventional’ international

humanitarian aid structure and its coordination mechanisms, partnerships in humanitarian aid,

information sharing and information management in the humanitarian system. Presenters and

facilitators were Stuart Kefford (STAIT), Zedoun Alzoebi (UOSSM), Vicky Acken (GOAL), Isabella Lisk

(SLUKDERT) and Christian Gad (DRC). The focus group discussions were facilitated by the DEMAC

consortium’s team.

On the third day, the discussions and results from the previous days were summarized by Mingo Heiduk

(DRC) and jointly recommendations for potential collaboration and coordination between

conventional and Diaspora actors developed. The workshop concluded with assembling strategic

priorities for future humanitarian engagement and suggesting policy recommendations for the World

Humanitarian Summit (WHS) facilitated by Elvina Quaison (AFFORD).

Some of the themes chosen for the

group work included, Principles

guiding humanitarian action and

international protection standards,

Humanitarian Ethics, Challenges and

comparative advantages of

coordination/co-operation, needs

assessment, Information Sharing,

Operational steps towards an

integrative humanitarian system,

designing plans for potential

collaboration and coordination,

strategic priorities for future

humanitarian engagement.

3. MAIN POINTS OF DISCUSSIONS Ethics, Humanity and Humanitarian Principles in Practice

The introductory session explored knowledge and common understanding of humanitarian principles

and codes of conduct. It was followed by an interactive group session on the similarities and differences

between faith-based charters, codes of conduct and humanitarian principles, highlighting the

complementarity of both approaches. In the following session, the many challenges and at times

dilemmas in complex emergency situations adhering to humanitarian principles were presented. It was

recognised these challenges place demands on humanitarian organisations when it comes to adherence

to the principles of humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality as the basis for humanitarian

action. All participants agreed that the core principle forming the doctrine for involvement for all actors

is humanity.

5

Highlights from the group discussions Principles, ethical considerations and dilemmas in humanitarian practice were interactively debated and potential ways forward were discussed. During politically influenced crisis challenges occur for conventional actors regarding the

ability to follow and implement all the humanitarian principles in their response

There is a perception diaspora organisations are not considered as representing impartial and

neutral partners.

It was suggested for diaspora organisations, humanitarian ethics and principles are not choices,

but rather determined by motivations and other influencers.

It was recognised that some crisis situations create challenges of access for conventional actors while diaspora actors may not face the same challenges. A conventional actor in Syria spoke of

their productive partnership with a Syrian diaspora humanitarian organisation.

Some examples relating to neutrality and impartiality were discussed from the humanitarian

response to the Syrian crisis, which demonstrated challenges regarding practical and political

difficulties or restrictions impacting on conventional actors’ ability to respond neutrally.

Perceptions of diaspora and their motivations impacting on their ability to respond neutrally

were also discussed.

Diaspora humanitarianism

Diasporas are already acknowledged as important development actors. They also play a significant role

in pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis contexts, fuelled by feelings of loyalty, solidarity, and commitment to

their country of origin. The key findings of the DEMAC research report highlighted means and ways of

Diaspora engagement in humanitarian response. The role of diasporas as primary ‘responders’ and their

engagement with local affected communities have not been systematically considered so far and is not

fully documented by diaspora humanitarians themselves.

6

There are potential pitfalls of mainstreaming diaspora humanitarians into contemporary

humanitarian architecture. Partnerships should be complimentary and collaborative instead.

While all participants agreed on the

need for increased engagement and

cooperation between the conventional

and Diaspora spheres, a discussion on

the nature of potential partnerships

took place. It centred on the issue of

how to implement partnerships more

successfully in advance, throughout

and post-crisis. While diaspora

Organisations play a vital role in

responding to humanitarian crises,

conventional actors are faced with

ever tightening budgets constraints.

Partnerships between conventional

and Diaspora’ in general were considered crucial to the success of future humanitarian crisis responses

and long-term solutions.

Highlights from the group discussions Large parts of the discussion focused on potential modes of coordination between the

‘conventional’ humanitarian system and Diaspora initiatives and how to build upon Diasporas’

capacities become better incorporated into the humanitarian system.

There was a desire from all parties for clear definitions of what is meant by ‘diaspora’ and who

is diaspora. In terms of humanitarian response there was an interest for details of what this

looks like other than in the form of remittances.

Diaspora participants acknowledged the lack of existing data and knowledge regarding how

they work and the impact of their engagement. This information was seen as being important to

enable partnership with other diaspora and conventional actors..

Diaspora organisations have a perception that donors’ engagement initiatives are a driven by

access to migrant resources like remittances and voluntary personnel. The Diaspora consider

these assets as personal and community assets and some suggest they should not be

transformed to ‘contributions’ to the conventional humanitarian system.

Challenges of mainstreaming Diaspora Organisations into the conventional humanitarian

system were discussed. The participants agreed that partnerships should be based on

complimentary and collaborative working in order to provide a robust response while enabling

the diaspora to retain their ways of working.

7

Good Practices of Cooperation and Partnership

The session explored cooperation and

practical examples from the field

between diaspora and conventional

actors. An aspect that was highlighted by

Diaspora participants is the sheer human

capital the diaspora community have to

offer, which positions them well to

provide unique contributions to the

humanitarian community.

The example of Sierra Leone UK Diaspora

Ebola Response Taskforce (SLUKDERT)

as part of the collaborated humanitarian

response to the Ebola crisis in West Africa was shared. SLUKDERT demonstrated the comparative

advantage of Diasporas’ interaction with their home country in humanitarian response including, the

function as ‘bridge builders’ between conventional humanitarian actors and (governance) institutions

in the response zones, diaspora civic-oriented

involvement in their country of origin and

diaspora lobbying in the countries of residence,

allowing mass mobilisation of resources and

support mechanisms in the host country. In a

rapidly changing world with the advent of

communication technology and transportation,

transnational networks diminish traditional

boundaries between migrant communities and

crisis-affected communities.

Highlights from the group discussions Inclusion of Diaspora organisations into the humanitarian aid architecture and the

Transformative Agenda (TA) circles, may create synergy between leadership, policy and

operational space, which is what the TA seeks to harmonise throughout the humanitarian

system.

Good Models of Partnerships put forward during the group discussions included;

Long-term complimentary partnerships: mutual accountabilities, collaborative policy planning

through a shared platform.

Long-term advancement partnerships: focus on training and investment in institutions instead

of ‘capacity building’ that insinuates ‘lack of’ or ‘deficiency’. Thereby conventional actors

commit themselves to support Diaspora organisations to professionalize and to strengthen

local institutions through organic knowledge transfer. A promising example is IOM’s

engagement with the Somali Diaspora in Europe through the FINSOM initiatives.

Supplementary Partnership: Ad hoc support for specific humanitarian relief projects of

Diaspora organisations. Practical capability enhancement may constitute portion of the project.

8

Information sharing and information management in the humanitarian system

The limited scale of many Diaspora relief initiatives prevents the visibility of most of their activities by

the conventional humanitarian actors. This lack of knowledge about diaspora organisations’

engagement is responsible for the need of a deeper understanding of their potential and the impact of

their relief action on beneficiaries. Christian Gad’s presentation on coordinated needs assessment in

emergency situations emphasized the importance of needs assessment and highlighted how it informs

decision-making in the humanitarian system.

New technologies, such as social media, smartphones

and money transfer networks … offer vital prospect to

create new channels of gathering raw data as well as

verification of existing data with Diaspora

Organisations, due to their grassroots access.

Both ‘conventional’ and diaspora actors recognised the importance for enhancing diaspora

organisations’ capacity to assess needs and to share the information it gathers through its direct

contacts within affected communities, which offers opportunities for closer coordination. It was also

suggested conventional actors could benefit in their relief operations from diasporas’ linguistic skills

and cultural, and the social and economic linkages they retain to their countries of origin.

Highlights from the group discussions The use of communication tools and new technologies was explored between actors of both

spheres. Social media, smartphones and digital money transfer networks have simplified the

formation of virtual connections between Diasporas and disaster-affected communities in their

home countries. Through the use of these technologies, Diaspora organisations could provide

additional data and input as well as verify data from local community-based organisations

and/or state institutions.

Both actors acknowledged the importance of creating platforms to share expertise, risk

assessment and information management tools, as it could enhance the impact of diaspora

initiatives as well conventional humanitarian response.

9

Focus group discussions: Operational steps towards an integrated humanitarian system

Participants split into three focus groups that discussed the characteristics, particularities and

perceptions of the humanitarian responses in the Somali, Sierra Leonean and Syrian crises

including a stakeholder analysis and an analysis of ‘conventional’ and diaspora coordination and

cooperation mechanisms. It became apparent during this focus group discussion that in the course of

the humanitarian crises, both sets of actors operated in parallel structures with limited information

about the operations of other actors.

Conventional Humanitarian Actors’ relief operations are focused on immediate response and provision of relief. They also demonstrate higher degrees of disaster preparedness and more

sustainable responses to humanitarian crises.

In contrast, diaspora organisations responses to crises are not limited to relief only, but have an

integrated developmental element too. Due to the less restrictive manner of their coordination,

funding and structures they often have greater flexibility, this flexibility can translate into no clear

objectives of intervention and ad-hoc methods of measuring impact. Nonetheless, it was

recognised the Diaspora are the first line responders to crisis due to their close ties to the

‘homeland’ and can reach crisis zones through remittances and other community support

mechanisms

In natural disaster relief the Conventional Humanitarian Actors become de facto replacement of

state institutions where the ministries are supposed to be in the coordination role. In such

absence of a corresponding partner, the cluster service makes coordination challenging. With the

growing number of actors in the field, coordination becomes more about who is doing what rather

than to focus on the aid recipient community’s needs.

Trust and accountability were identified as the major obstacles to mutual understanding and

meaningful coordination. For conventional actors, it is the lack of paper trails of some Diaspora

organisations that, makes transparency and auditing challenging to ensure that donor funding

criteria can be met. For diaspora organisations, it is the lack of accountability by conventional

actors vis-à-vis the beneficiaries.

The establishment of sustainable dialogue forums for diaspora and conventional engagement

could reinforce commitments to further cooperation and enhance all actors’ understanding

through knowledge-sharing and systematizing lessons learned

10

Recommendations The workshop acted as an initial for greater dialogue between Diaspora representatives and

Conventional actors. The following recommendations were seen as tangible points of departure for

better cooperation and coordination between both actors to create a more effective Humanitarian

system.

Recognition of contextual differences and challenges as well as comparative advantages of engagement and the complementarity of both sectors: examples from Sierra Leone and Syria demonstrated the inter-operability of both sectors enabling the mitigation of each other’s weaknesses.

Trust and accountability were identified as the major obstacles to mutual understanding and meaningful coordination. Thus, improved transparency and accountability of donors and conventional humanitarian actors to Diaspora and beneficiaries would increase trust. On the other hand, more documentation of diaspora activities to improve transparency and auditable paper trial to mitigate donor concerns

Inclusion of Diaspora organisations into the consultative humanitarian aid architecture and the Transformative Agenda (TA) circles, to create better synergy between leadership, policy and operational space, which is what the TA seeks to harmonise throughout the humanitarian system.

Avoid mainstreaming Diaspora Organisations into conventional model organisations. Partnerships should be based on complimentary and collaborative responses to bring Diaspora Organisations from the periphery of the international humanitarian system, while retaining their own distinctiveness.

Better use of communication tools and new technologies like Social media, smartphones and digital money transfer networks, which streamline virtual connections between Diasporas and disaster-affected communities in their home countries. These technologies will allow Diaspora organisations to provide additional data and input, as well as verify data from local community-based organisations and/or state institutions.

Creation of Diaspora/Conventional networks that share expertise, risk assessment and information management tools, a platform that could enhance the impact of diaspora initiatives as well conventional humanitarian response.

“This document covers DEMAC activities implemented with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and the European

Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.”

11

List of Participants

Diaspora Organisations

Zedoun Al Zoebi, Union of Syrian Medical Care & Relief Organisations (UOSSM), Germany

Kiptieu Agyei, Heaven Homes, UK

Soumaiya El-Azem, Jasmin-Hilfe e.V., Germany/Kuwait

Elisabeth Conteh, Organisation of Sierra Leone Health Professionals Abroad, UK

Adam Xusen Garad, Himilo Relief and Development Association (HIRAD), Denmark

Mohamed Hassan Hagi, Southern Somalia's Peace and Development organisation SSPDO, Denmark

Dunja Khoury, Barada Syrienhilfe e.V. Germany

Isabella Lisk, Sierra Leone UK Diaspora Ebola Response Taskforce (SLUKDERT), UK

Fadi Al Dairi, Hand in Hand for Syria, UK

Ahmed Dharbaxo, Diaspora Consultant, Denmark

Yassin Ahmed Osoble, OFROSOM, Denmark

Abdulaziz Ramadan, Union of Kurdish Students in Syria and Germany e.V. (UKSSD) (Germany)

Hamza Jama, Danish Human Appeal, Denmark

Memuna Janneh, LunchBoxGift, UK

Alberta Stevens, Engayde, UK

Mazen Charbak, Homs League Abroad, UK

Abdurahman Ugas Muhammed, DAN-TA QOYS-KA, DK

Fatu Wurie, Survivor’s Dream Project, Sierra Leone

Conventional actors

Hélène Michalak, Syria expert, France

Frantz Celestin, IOM Somalia Head, Labour Mobility and Human Development Division, Somalia

Christian Gad, DRC, Global emergency coordinator, Denmark

Zamzam Ibrahim, Save the Children, Humanitarian recruiter, UK

Kathrine Starup, DRC, Protection Global Specialist Lead, Denmark

Anne-Sophie Laenkholm, ECHO, Protection Global expert, Belgium

Sevda Simsek, Islamic Relief Deutschland, Regional desk coordinator, Germany

Alessandra Incerti, Y Care International, Africa Programme coordinator

Stuart Kefford, UNDP Senior Transformative Agenda Implementation Team (STAIT), Switzerland

Vicki Acken, Country director Syria, GOAL, Turkey

Natia Moshashvili, MENA Community Centre Program manager, DRC, Lebanon

Jeremiah Kibanya, Faith & Development Technical Advisor, Somalia, World Vision International

Claire Lamont, Senior Officer GISR, UNHCR

DEMAC Consortium

Mingo Heiduk Tetsche, Team Leader Diaspora Programme, DRC, Denmark.

Béatrice Mauconduit, DEMAC Consortium Coordinator, DRC, Denmark.

Erik Mohns, Project Manager, Berghof Foundation, Germany

Elvina Quaison, Project Coordinator, AFFORD, UK.

Onyekachi Wambu, Director, AFFORD, UK.

DEMAC Consultant

Masud Abdi, DEMAC Consultant, Denmark

humanitarian principles, volunteerism & coordination ... · demac humanitarian workshop series...

Documents