Kuwaiti Minister of Energy Sheikh Ahmad talks to Saudi Arabia's Prince Bandar in Riyadh.
LONDON (AlertNet)' Most people in the West think aid comes from the West, but countries like China, India and Saudi Arabia are quietly becoming increasingly important players in the humanitarian field.
The trend is highlighted in a new report which says the West must talk more to donors in Asia, the Gulf and Central Europe to better co-ordinate aid and ensure it is tailored to the needs of people in disaster zones rather than the haphazard interests of donors.
'This report should challenge the notion that aid is a Western enterprise,' said Adele Harmer, co-author of the report by the Humanitarian Policy Group of British-based thinktank Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
'It's been suggested that post 9/11 we're living in an increasingly polarised world. If this is the case, then it's more important than ever to reflect the fact that aid is a universal pursuit, not necessarily being given or determined exclusively by the West," she said.
The rise of new donors could also be good news for aid workers who think the perception that aid is a Western activity has made them increasingly vulnerable to attack.
'Changing the image of aid from being a Western government pursuit to being something much more universal is going to have knock-on effects and benefits in a whole range of areas, and perhaps aid worker security is one of them,' Harmer said.
The majority of humanitarian aid comes from the traditional big Western donors, who are represented on the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
But the ODI analysis found that non-DAC donors gave between one and 12 percent of total humanitarian aid between 1999 and 2004. The percentage isn't huge, but their influence can be crucial, especially in spheres where they concentrate attention, such as North Korea and the Palestinian territories.
The report says the share of aid from non-DAC donors is likely to increase, especially if aid-giving from countries such as China and India remains linked to economic growth.
Closed clubThese other donors 'the oil-rich Gulf states in particular, as well as parts of Asia and Central Europe ' are not new kids on the block, they just haven't been invited to the parties.
Harmer told AlertNet the non-DAC donors had been active donors since the 1960s, being especially generous after natural disasters in neighbouring countries.
'They had aid programmes. They weren't defined in the same terms, but they certainly reached out beyond their borders and provided cash and in-kind assistance,' she said.
Despite this, rich Western countries haven't taken much notice until now. No one was tracking the non-DAC donations, and the OECD members didn't think it would affect them unless their turf was under threat.
'When their aid portfolios bump up against each other, then they pay attention,' Harmer said.
Harmer said the OECD was not really open to newcomers. 'The rich and industrialised countries came into those positions over 100 years ago and formed a club, which has strict rules on membership.'
She said the DAC would probably not absorb many new members, but it was already recognising the need to open dialogue with other donors, especially the Gulf states.
The ODI report argues that it's vital to work with non-DAC donors to strive towards a humanitarian aid system based on the needs of people whose lives have been turned upside-down by disaster and conflict.
As things stand, donors everywhere tend to give to countries where it will help their strategic interests ' politically, militarily, ideologically or economically.
But Harmer is optimistic that this could change, and DAC countries are starting to deal with the issue. In 2003 they signed up to the Good Humanitarian Donor Initiative, which commits them to giving aid according to need.
'It wouldn't be appropriate for DAC donors to say aid has to be given impartially ... and then turn around and not behave that way themselves, which is so often the case,' Harmer said.
But she added: 'The discussion about impartiality hasn't really started at all for non-DAC donors.'
Bam earthquakeGulf states often help Islamic countries, and Arab countries have had a tangible effect on living standards in Palestinian territories by funding Red Crescent societies building houses and providing health care.
When the ancient Iranian town of Bam was devastated by an earthquake in December 2003, donors from East and West rushed to offer help, without checking what survivors needed.
'It was a cacophony of political interests,' Harmer said. 'There were 18 military sealed hospitals. All to ensure they were flying the donor's national flag,'
While Western countries often give aid partly to show it off in front of their own electorate, other donors are often less concerned about high visibility. China and Gulf countries tend to give quietly without a fanfare.
China already plays a significant role in Africa, for example, but no one knows exactly how much or just what it funds.
Aid analysts work on the assumption there is a limited amount of humanitarian aid money available each year - about $6.5 billion. But Harmer said if you included non-DAC donors the amount had to considerably bigger.
If donors were transparent about the total size of the aid pot they could be more coherent in their funding, and avoid overlapping, she said.
The amounts from non-DAC donors are significant. In 2003, Saudi Arabia gave $58.1 million in aid, ranking 18th in the world and giving more humanitarian aid than Austria, Ireland or New Zealand.
In per capita terms, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are the largest, giving $15 per head, $14 and $2.50 per person respectively in 2003.
Among DAC donors, Norway gave $80 per citizen the same year, but many others gave less than $10.
It is hard to track non-DAC donations, since they usually bypass the U.N. system and give directly to governments, or sometimes to Red Cross and Red Crescent societies.
They also give about 60 percent of their aid in kind, so U.N. agencies that accept this sort of donation ' such as the U.N. World Food Programme (WFP) are more likely to attract non-DAC donors.
China and India give their surplus crops to WFP, which Harmer said was good at thinking creatively.
It teams up countries to fund delivery. So, for example, it might get Canada to pay for Indian food to be transported to Afghanistan.
'You've got to be innovative to think of that,' Harmer said.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
