LONDON (AlertNet) - In the immediate aftermath of January's devastating earthquake in Haiti, the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia was slammed for not pledging aid. But perhaps the critics were a little hasty.
Nearly two weeks after the disaster, Riyadh said it would donate $50 million to the United Nations appeal to fund humanitarian work. And nearly four months later, Saudi Arabia is the third-largest government donor, behind the United States and Canada, accounting for 6 percent of the total.
Other contributors to the Haiti appeal outside the wealthy donor club of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development include Brazil ($12.1 million), Thailand ($4.7 million) and the Russian Federation ($4.2 million).
These amounts add up to only a small proportion of the $834 million promised for humanitarian work in Haiti so far. But the controversy around the Saudi donation reflects growing expectations for non-Western governments to do their bit for disaster response.
A recent paper from the London-based Overseas Development Institute (ODI), entitled Diversity in donorship: Field lessons, highlights the expanding and evolving role of these donors in the humanitarian landscape.
The research, commissioned by ODI's Humanitarian Policy Group, draws on case studies of emergency response in three countries: the 2005 earthquake and 2007 floods in Pakistan; the 2006 Israeli offensive in Lebanon; and ongoing humanitarian operations in the conflict-torn Darfur region of western Sudan.
This Q&A highlights key findings from the study.
What and who are non-DAC donors?
Humanitarian and development aid has traditionally been dominated by the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's Development Assistance Committee (DAC). They now number 23 nations, comprised largely of European Union states, plus the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea (from 2010). But, as the ODI paper points out, the number of donors commonly supporting a humanitarian response has grown from about a dozen a decade ago to around 50 or 60 now. This reflects growing humanitarian action among nations that are not members of the DAC - often referred to as "non-DAC donors". Between 2000 and 2008, the largest non-DAC humanitarian aid providers were, in order, Saudi Arabia, South Korea (which has since joined the DAC), the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Russia, Turkey, China, Qatar, South Africa and India.
How much humanitarian funding do non-DAC donors provide?
Contributions from non-DAC donors have risen steadily in the past decade, but still account for only a small percentage of reported humanitarian flows. In 2008, non-DAC funding reached $1.18 billion, making up 12 percent of total official humanitarian aid. This was a sharp jump from $391 million the previous year, thanks to a $500 million allocation by Saudi Arabia to the U.N. World Food Programme's food price crisis appeal. From 2000 to 2008, just four states - Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait and Qatar - accounted for nearly two-thirds of non-DAC humanitarian aid. But the ODI study says the relatively minor financial weight of these emerging donors does not always translate into a low profile, with China for example exerting considerable influence over policy in Darfur. The report notes, however, that the information available at a global level on non-DAC aid volumes is often lower than that reported at country level.
Where is the money spent?
According to the ODI research, most non-DAC donors provide humanitarian aid to countries in their region, with a focus on one or two high-profile crises each year - such as the Iraq war in 2003, the Palestinian territories in 2004, the tsunami and Pakistan quake in 2005, the Lebanon conflict in 2006 and Bangladesh cyclone in 2007 (Saudi Arabia was the largest international donor to this emergency, accounting for more than 55 percent of the total). The largest reported recipients of Gulf State humanitarian aid in 2000Â?2008 were, in order, the Palestinian territories, Bangladesh, Lebanon, Iraq, Pakistan and Sudan. However, the report notes that the Gulf States are beginning to channel more funding outside traditional regions to countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, as well as making more contributions through the United Nations.
How is non-DAC aid delivered?
Most non-DAC donors have favoured providing humanitarian aid as bilateral, government-to-government assistance, in particular Russia, Qatar, India and Saudi Arabia. Between 2000 and 2008, the ten largest channelled an average of 38 percent directly to recipient governments, compared with just 2.5 percent for the top ten DAC donors, according to ODI. In the case of Pakistan, for example, around two-thirds of non-DAC aid was delivered through the government, compared to a fifth for all donors. The study also finds that non-DAC donors continue to provide aid through state mechanisms even when recipient governments are involved in conflicts, except in the Lebanon war where some money went to non-governmental local groups. Another important channel for non-DAC donors is national Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, particularly for the Gulf States.
The report says non-DAC emergency assistance tends to be speedy, and in-kind relief supplies and technical assistance teams are often first on the ground. However, there is less interest in offering support based on assessments of the needs of those affected, with responses largely perceived as a form of solidarity. The study says non-DAC donors' understanding of humanitarian aid is broader than that of DAC states and international aid agencies, and incorporates development assistance and even economic investment provided in times of crisis. It also identifies an emphasis on moving swiftly from relief to reconstruction after disasters.
What is the relationship between non-DAC donors and the rest of the international aid community?
Links with non-DAC donors and awareness of their role and contributions are limited, the ODI report says. One reason is that non-DAC states rarely use formal aid coordination mechanisms, particularly in sudden-onset crises. A lack of evaluation and analysis is an obstacle to non-DAC donors learning and improving their responses, and they are rarely included in international exercises. Nonetheless, the paper highlights increasing interest among DAC governments, U.N. agencies and some NGOs to engage with non-DAC donors because of their growing political influence and potential to fill funding gaps.
In a speech at a major aid conference in Dubai in 2008, U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes urged the region's governments to make more use of the multilateral aid system, arguing many countries underestimate its value in their preference for bilateral approaches. "Without this balance there is...a risk that perceptions of humanitarian assistance as principally a western enterprise Â? however incorrect these are Â? will be reinforced," he said. Yet, according to the ODI study, there are still no formal forums for discussion with non-DAC donors outside the U.N.'s General Assembly and Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
